# OMI 10-26-23

## AI meeting summary

- Lyuma unexpectedly joins a conversation, causing surprise.
- They discuss the usefulness of a glTF UID extension to prevent loss of context and preserve extras in discussions.
- The possibility of proposing an extension with the Godot namespace is mentioned.
- There is frustration regarding implementation without a KHR prefix and discussion about the politics surrounding it.
- The potential benefits of a UID extension are recognized by everyone, including Unity.
- The debate centers around whether the UID should be numeric or string-based to avoid confusion with indexes in glTF files.
- Changing node names in Blender causes problems when importing modified nodes into game engines like Godot.
- A proposed solution is creating an extension called Khruid that uses unique identifiers (UIDs) for each node.

The discussion in this part of the transcript revolves around the need to preserve nodes and their identities when renaming or moving them. The participants highlight that solving this issue is not limited to nodes but also applies to textures and materials. They agree to implement a solution for all resource types in Godot. There is also a mention of tools like glTF and the importance of preserving unique identifiers (UIDs) during transformations. The participants discuss the possibility of stripping out UIDs, but ultimately agree that they should be preserved if possible. They express confusion over why anyone would want to intentionally remove UIDs. Additionally, they address concerns about duplicated efforts and propose that KHR extensions must have identical identifiers as vendor extensions upon graduation. The conversation touches on the use cases for game engines like Unity and Godot, emphasizing the need for intuitive workflows, allowing users to rename and refactor objects easily without disrupting connections or breaking things. There is also a discussion about OMI extensions versus KHR extensions, with some doubts raised about certain experimental extensions' practicality at this stage.

The personality extension has generated a lot of interest, with many people reaching out to inquire about it. There is a discussion on the importance of having multiple extensions and aligning efforts, particularly regarding pets in virtual worlds. The difference between an agent and a pet is debated, but there is agreement that pets have more precedence. Implementing Unique Identifiers (UID) in applications like Godot and Unity is discussed as beneficial for preserving attachments and assets during iterative pipelines. The potential introduction of logic-based scripting systems as visual scripting or pure bytecode representations generates skepticism due to past experiences with rejection by users. However, Unreal Engine's successful implementation of visual scripting provides some hope for its adoption. The development of such systems should involve open comment periods before finalization. The possibility of implementing animation graphs through unified standards is considered more feasible than full-fledged scripting systems. Frustration arises from the lack of descriptions in certain MPEG extensions related to spatial audio and avatar definitions, which are not openly discussed with other relevant parties like VRM developers.

## Summary
The participants in the conversation discuss the possibility of moving the meeting time for glTF extensions to accommodate more participants. They consider early morning or weekend meetings, but there are concerns about work schedules and availability. They express a desire for more diverse voices and participation in order to create better standards. The conversation also touches on the slow progress of standardization work and potential challenges with implementation by tech companies like Unity.

The speaker discusses the lack of recent work on glTF physics, specifically gravity. They mention that there is no defined spec for physics materials and express interest in collaborating with Omi on implementing Microsoft's physics materials spec. The speaker suggests that additional extensions could be built upon the existing framework for less standardized physics features like sound effects for collisions. They also inquire about inter-extension dependencies within Kronos and discuss the possibility of standardizing a general-purpose metadata system for defining audio properties in glTF files. The conversation touches on the challenges of audio design, including the need to avoid hard-coding material names and finding experts in audio to help solve these problems. They highlight the gap between graphics tools and real-time audio options, expressing a desire for an industry-wide specification similar to PBR visuals but focused on audio representation. The discussion concludes with reflections on ad hoc solutions currently used in game development and the lack of standardization across engines regarding how materials interact from an audio perspective.

## Action items
Follow-ups from the transcript:

- Explore the possibility of a glTF UID extension that would provide a unique identifier for nodes and resources in a glTF scene. This extension would allow for consistent referencing and preservation of edits, even if the scene's composition changes.
- Consider proposing an extension with the Godot namespace for the glTF UID extension.
- Investigate the potential for a glTF extension focused on a general-purpose scripting system, similar to Unreal Engine's visual scripting system. This extension could provide a standardized way to include scripting logic within glTF files.
- Discuss the idea of having an earlier meeting time for the glTF extensions working group to accommodate participants who are unable to join the current meeting time.
- Explore the need for a more diverse group of participants in the glTF extensions working group to ensure a wider range of perspectives and expertise.
- Further discuss the idea of a standardized audio material extension for glTF that would allow for more advanced and realistic audio interactions in virtual environments.

## Outline

Based on the given transcript, it is difficult to create a comprehensive outline with chapters and timestamps as the conversation seems to be fragmented and lacks clear topics or progression. The conversation appears to be a casual discussion among participants about various subjects related to audio, scripting systems, meeting times, and glTF extensions. The timestamps provided in the transcript do not correspond to specific topics or discussions, making it challenging to create a meaningful outline. It would be more helpful to have a more structured conversation or specific questions/topics to work with.

## Notes
Based on the transcript, here are some shorthand bullet-point notes:
- The conversation is being recorded and parsed into text.
- The conversation is part of the Omi TLTF working group meeting.
- The agenda for the meeting includes three topics.
- There is a discussion about extensions and meeting time.
- There is mention of an export glTF option.
- There is talk about IDs within a document and references.
- There is a discussion about a visual scripting system.
- There is mention of general-purpose scripting inside a glTF file.
- There is talk about preserving attachments and animations.
- There is mention of anchoring a scene in the real world environment.
- There is a mention of meeting logistics and timing.
- There is talk about the need for clear and understandable explanations.
- There is a discussion about standardization and representation of sound.
- There is mention of audio materials and predefined sound effects.
- There is talk about the problem of audio and the need for a defined solution.
- There is mention of building ad hoc solutions for audio interactions.
Please note that these bullet-point notes are a summary of the main topics discussed in the transcript.