OMI_link discussion thread

[lyuma]

https://github.com/omigroup/gltf-extensions/tree/main/extensions/2.0/OMI_link
From meeting 2022-12-08

OMI_link

• Lyuma: concern about unspecified (non-interoperable) behavior of relative URIs.

• fragment identifiers in URIs deserve a spec:

  • node names;
  • should we make a spec for position fragment identifiers?\
  • It may be wise to consider both the start and end point (preserve offset in the target document or fragment relative to the OMI_link node

• Add a type attribute?

• Add multiple links for fallback (for example vrchat:// but perhaps a http uri if vrchat is not installed.

• Any destination extensions may be assumed to be a destination if there

• Perhaps OMI_link could go to any anchor target. Would we use node name? or do we want it within an extension to guarantee uniqueness?

click me
```