>> For instance, how do you provide a common set of recognized "meanings"
>> to a distributed Internet audience? It's relatively easy to
>> standardize 3d graphical display, but how do you standardize
>> behavioral interaction? In the broadest political sense, you simply
>> can't.
>
>Here we go with the "commonly recognized meanings" thing again. Okay,
>I'll say it again: Yes, we need to work on this. Yes we need to provide
>for people whose languages are written a ideograms. Yes we need to gain
>expereince in their background in order to understand how to represent
>things to them.
That all depends on what you're doing. Van Gogh (properly) felt no particular
obligation to provide versions of his works that made sense in different
cultural contexts. Artwork is inherently from a particular cultural
perspective. It is the ability of an audience to appreciate this perspective
which can make an artwork universal (whether Western in origin or otherwise).
Aside from the artistic aspects, I expect that developing broadly accessible
VR worlds will more involve the development of conventions that *everyone* will
have to learn. Only institutions with broad financial resources (entertainment
conglomerates, governmental orgs., etc.) can afford to translate all of their
content into many different languages, never mind adapt them greatly for
different cultural contexts.
--Andy
andyn@texas.net