Is this group still alive?

[Reinoud Zandijk]

Hello folks,

is this group still alive?

Reinoud

[Hadi GSCOP]

Hi all.

I am not sure if its still active or not. I guess we can still make use of it. 

Regards 

Hadi AZMAN 

UKM

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "STL 2.0" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to stl2+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to st...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/stl2.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Jacob Barhak]

Hi Hadi,

If this standardization effort is still alive, I recall an old discussion regarding which kind of standard to use and many people wanted an open standard.

Did anyone consider a SISO standard?

https://www.sisostds.org/

This is an open standard that people can use without paying for it.

Yet let us figure out first is this group is still active. Hopefully it is.

             Jacob

--

Jacob Barhak Ph.D.

http://sites.google.com/site/jacobbarhak/

[Hod Lipson]

Hi all,

 

Yes, AMF is still active officially. It was also adopted by ISO.

But adoption is low.

 

--hod

 

 

 

Hod Lipson

Prof. of Mechanical Engineering and Data Science, Columbia University in NYC

Mudd 535E, 500 W. 120th St., New York, NY 10027 USA

Cell: (607) 592 4383  Email: hod.l...@columbia.edu

[Jacob Barhak]

So Hod,

If adoption is low due to need to pay for the standard, you may want to consider switching to SISO if there is no restriction imposed by ISO. 

SISO standards are open and free for users. I recall this was one of the discussion points.

In any case, I am happy to learn this effort is still alive. 

          Jacob

[Torsten Paul]

On 03.01.19 13:42, Jacob Barhak wrote:
> In any case, I am happy to learn this effort is still alive.

There is certainly not much effort showing that to the
outside world.

Did anyone try http://stl2.org/ lately? Not very promising.
The Wikipedia page even links to to archive.org

At this point, I don't see any reason to put more work
into AMF.

AMF has:
- a spec hidden behind a paywall which is a problem for
open source tools

3MF has:
- an open spec supported by a non-profit organization
- a reference library implementing the spec which is
working on all 3 major platforms and usable under a
very liberal BSD license
- developers maintaining the library who are responding
to issues and pull requests on github
- development package for the library waiting to be
included into Debian

I saw some mentions of AMF and 3MF talking about joining
efforts, is that a thing or just someone trolling?

I can't judge how important the open source view is
in that discussion. It might be just a small part of
the full picture, but it could probably help with
adoption. Having a development library just ready to
use might be a nice incentive to add a format to more
tools.

ciao,
Torsten.

[Charles Overy]

I have STL2.org.  Happy to point it wherever anyone thinks it should go or give it to any non-profit.

Charles 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "STL 2.0" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to stl2+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to st...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/stl2.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Charles Overy

Director - CEO 

p:970.827.5274 sms:800.448.8808

www.lgm3d.com | www.cadspan.com

Follow LGM on Twitter Facebook LinkedIn