[opensource-dev] Missing capabilities.

Kelly Linden kelly at lindenlab.com
Tue Oct 12 08:37:42 PDT 2010


I'm confused on this. While the term 'capability' is a bit vague, in SL
development / programming it is very specific. It is not a flag that
indicates the availability of a feature - it is an access point to access
features. It has the great side benefit of being able to indicate the
availability of those features by the presence of the capability. However
not all features are new capabilities.

What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't add dummy capabilities to indicate
the presence of a features that doesn't use a capability. It sounds like we
need some ability to indicate the availability of specific features - either
some feature map or versioning on specific capabilities. If we extended the
ability of an existing capability, perhaps we should have included a version
in some way when we did so. If the feature did not use capabilities (the
inventory is still a mix of legacy, event poll and capabilities isn't it?) -
then perhaps there is another way to determine if the feature is supported.

Or did I misunderstand the problem?

 - Kelly

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Henri Beauchamp <sldev at free.fr> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> There are, in my opinion, missing capabilities for the new viewer 2
> features, namely the capabilities dealing with inventory item links
> support, multiple attachments per point support, and multiple clothing
> layers support.
>
> Without the correpsonding capabilities, it is impossible for the viewer
> to adapt its sets of tools to the servers in OpenSim grids. Of course,
> I could just make the assumption that these features are only available
> in SL and then disable them for OpenSim, but I'm pretty sure they will
> appear in the latter, sooner or later...
>
> So, either LL implements the corresponding new capabilities in their
> server (and future viewer versions), or we would need OpenSim server
> developpers to "reserve" the capabilities (so that the viewer developpers
> may simply test for either the SL grids or the presence of the
> capabilities to decide whether the corresponding features should be
> enabled or not after login).
>
> It's also a bit worrying to see that LL doesn't seem to care much any
> more about backward compatibility (and therefore about OpenSim
> compatibility)...
>
> Any thought on this ?
>
> Henri.
> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20101012/5c2f75f1/attachment.htm 


More information about the opensource-dev mailing list