Is it too early to consider 3D html?

Re:Is it too early to consider 3D html? by jamesbressi on Thursday April 22, 2010 @10:45AM (#1285202)

I do like to use the "just because you can, it doesn't mean you should" filter like @JeremyBanks but I will say that the idea does excite me. If all browsers would support such a language like @jmount13 linked to (from what I see they don't?) I would love to explore the possibilities.

Many flash website and advanced java/jquery/css site concepts and designs that have wowed people in the past had elements of three dimensional experience, so I say why not adopt it and see where it goes?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Is it too early to consider 3D html? by vidarh on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:18AM (#1285307)

They don't all support VRML because after a brief fad around '95-'97 or thereabout, VRML died a quick death when people got bored of it and realized they had no actual need for it.

The popularity of VRML coincided with a VR fad in general though, so perhaps it'd stand a chance again today with the resurgence of 3D movies etc., but I think WebGL is more likely to be successful in that respect.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Is it too early to consider 3D html? by contextfree on Thursday April 22, 2010 @11:32AM (#1285350)

I can see the VR fad returning thanks to the 20-year nostalgia cycle!

More seriously, I do think the standard arguments against 3D UI will carry less force in the not too distant future (i.e. over the next 10 to 15 years), because of new(ish) I/O capabilities which will allow people to make more use of real-world spatial abilities to interact with computers (e.g. motion/vision control), and allow more ways to use computers to manipulate the physical world (robotics, 3D printing, ...)

[ Parent | on HN ]