Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!news!matt
From: matt@mandala.think.com (Matt Fitzgibbon)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Scene Description Standard
Message-ID: <MATT.91Apr30142917@mandala.think.com>
Date: 30 Apr 91 19:29:17 GMT
References: <1991Apr30.003612.16050@mks.com> <30137@rouge.usl.edu>
Sender: news@Think.COM
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Lines: 12
In-Reply-To: msr@gator.cacs.usl.edu's message of 30 Apr 91 05:56:25 GMT

In article <30137@rouge.usl.edu> msr@gator.cacs.usl.edu (Srinivas R. Manapragada) writes:

   Yes it would be nice to have a standard. However it should be more
   expressive
   and powerful than the language of say rayshade, which allows hierarchical
   objects to be defined rather easily. However one should also have some
   kind of procedural features.

Rather than define another new language, has anyone explored using
Lisp or some subset as a geometric description language?

-Matt