Good thought, although I don't think there's much stopping you doing that today. Unless I'm missing something, 3d scenes are mostly a set of objects (meshes). You can store that in a list just fine.
If you want a scenegraph, you have the same use case as a collaboratively editable DOM - which is, you want a list of lists (of lists...). As Michael said, there won't be any conflicting keys there anyway. You'll still want the move-to-list operation, which will appear in the new JSON code regardless of how we handle move-to-object. By contrast, the current JSON type lets you move things around inside a list, but not between different lists. -J On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry to bump in here, but another potential use case of Json syncing > eventually could be for 3d collaboration. If multiple people could work of > a 3d scene based on Json data (as webGL can be: > http://www.lighthouse3d.com/2013/07/webgl-importing-a-json-formatted-3d-model/ > ) , it should be possible to make a ShareJS based collaborative 3d > environment - which itself then has other interesting possibilities in > turn. This is only vague thinking at the moment , but might be worth baring > in mind. > > > ~~~ > Thomas & Bertines online review show: > http://randomreviewshow.com/index.html > Try it! You might even feel ambivalent about it :)
