[sldev] "Unreferenced" assets

[Kent Quirk (Q Linden)]

If we're gonna do a client-side scripting language, which has been  
discussed from time to time, it seems like we should solve the more  
general problem of client-side scripting systems for things like UI  
(HUDs) and automation. Given that we've committed to Mono server-side,  
seems like we'd want to leverage tools and engineering know-how and  
use Mono client-side too.

Which is not to be making any promises, just an expression of where  
this discussion has led in the past.

	Q

On May 21, 2008, at 10:44 PM, Sean Lynch wrote:

> While this wouldn't affect the need to serialize the attachment's  
> script states (usually just in the attachment asset itself) at  
> logout, this could potentially make teleport simpler and more  
> reliable due to not needing to send attachments between simulators.  
> This is not trivial due to the fact that attachments can currently  
> interact not just with people's viewers (particle scripts and the  
> like) but with stuff in the simulator, just like a script in a non- 
> attached object.
>
> Perhaps a faster way to this would be an attachment-scripting  
> language that just ran right in your viewer. Javascript maybe?
>
> On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net>  
> wrote:
> Kelly Linden wrote:
> Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> On 2008-05-20, at 13:37, Kelly Linden wrote:
> So, resident inventory lives in the (DB) and each item references  
> one or more assets in (ASC).  Object inventory lives in (SIM) and  
> each item references one or more assets in (ASC).  Items actually in  
> world don't really reference any asset in (ASC) or anything in  
> (DB).  Keeping items inside the contents of objects in world and  
> *not* in your inventory reduces the load of (DB) and may help keep  
> your inventory loading faster, depending on how much you do it.  It  
> doesn't have any effect on (ASC) load though.
>
> Aha, so for attachments then... I assume they're fragile because  
> they're handled by the sim, with an original reference back to the  
> inventory, but *not* saved in sim state.
>
> Yes, more or less.  They are the only case of an item in world that  
> is also in your inventory, and the only case of an item in world  
> that isn't in the sim state saves.  That makes them doubly unique,  
> and doubly fun.  They also cross region boundaries far more than any  
> other object, which has significant implications.
>
> I'm wondering how this interacts with Zero's proposed Agent Domain  
> script server for attachments? Someone pointed out to him a while  
> back that bling scripts might need to be dealt with differently than  
> regular scripts, even in untrusted Region Domains (bling is part of  
> Avatar Identity afterall) so one plausible solution was to have the  
> scripts stay running but be kept in a private script server just for  
> attachments.
>
>
> Lawson
>
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20080521/7d6ee610/attachment.htm