Re-imagining the Metaverse as a “Web of Worlds”

While the current metaverse landscape is often fragmented into isolated “walled gardens” or closed platforms, the WoW vision reimagines it as a cohesive network of linked, addressable 3D worlds. Much like today’s websites form a unified digital ecosystem, these spatial experiences function as web endpoints that enable seamless navigation and traversal between virtual environments.

By providing a single URI for every discrete virtual world, users can move through the metaverse with the same ease they browse the 2D web. This approach leverages the power of linked spatial experiences, where complete or partial worlds can be referenced, bookmarked, and shared across platforms.

Built on Open Web Platform (OWP) Values

The WoW framework extends the core values of the Open Web Platform—universality, interoperability, decentralization, and accessibility—into 3D immersive environments. Our goal is to ensure the metaverse remains:

• Universal: Accessible through any standard browser on any device (desktop, mobile, or XR) without requiring proprietary software installs.
• Decentralized: Free from a single point of control or platform lock-in, prioritizing user-owned data and self-sovereign identity.
• Interoperable: Built on a foundation of open, royalty-free standards developed by consensus.

A Robust Technical Stack and API Architecture

To reduce complexity and encourage adoption, WoW leverages a harmonized “glue layer” of existing standards. The architecture is built on three core pillars:

1. Open Spatial World API: Treats virtual worlds as persistent API and HTTP endpoints, allowing users to join, view, and preview worlds using a single URI.
2. Open User Manifest API (The “Digital YOU”): Powers a portable, user-controlled identity layer. Utilizing JSON-LD, Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs), and Verifiable Credentials, users can carry their avatars, preferences, and assets across different virtual worlds.
3. Open Spatial Asset API: Facilitates modular, reusable 3D components by leveraging existing standards like glTF, X3D, and USD, which are already registered with IANA.

Privacy and User Ownership

Central to the WoW architecture is a “privacy-by-default” approach. By using a DID-enabled digital wallet to manage the User Manifest, individuals maintain full control over their data. The framework supports selective disclosure, ensuring only the data strictly required for a specific experience is shared, often with explicit consent prompts for the user.

Human-AI Collaboration

The WoW framework is designed for the future of human-AI symmetry. In this ecosystem, AI agents operate alongside humans as collaborative partners, following the same standards and API methods. These agents can perform “spatial computing” functions—such as computing bounding volumes or detecting collisions—to assist humans in complex virtual tasks.

Scalable Use Cases for Every Industry

The WoW vision provides a concrete roadmap for diverse applications, including:

• Industrial Digital Twins: Standardized 3D data exchange for engineering and manufacturing, aligning with initiatives like Catena-X.
• Education: Immersive 3D Web Field Trips that allow educators to transport students to virtual locations for remote learning.
• Collaboration & Social: Seamless virtual meetings and cross-platform social experiences where avatars and assets remain consistent.
• Gaming: Interoperable entertainment experiences with portable assets and “metaverse bookmarks”.

The release of this whitepaper marks a significant step toward an open and interconnected 3D Web. We look forward to working with MSF members and SDOs to develop the standards and the requirements illustrated in this document and specified in the WoW API.

Whitepaper summary and link to full pdf: https://webofworlds.github.io/initial_MSF_Whitepaper

Repo: https://github.com/WebOfWorlds/WoWAPI

New Home Page with own domain
webofworlds.org

Next steps

• Q2 implementation previews (per whitepaper): simpleWorlds, threedy.io
• Strategic alignments: OMBI workshop at SIGGRAPH LA; OpenARCloud and OMA3 ongoing via Spatial Computing WG, MSF

Web of Worlds is on track to become the second MSF Initiative after OMBI, creating two complementary initiatives advancing an open, decentralized metaverse. Target launch: SIGGRAPH.

The post Announcing the Web of Worlds Whitepaper: A Concrete Path to the Open Metaverse appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

As AI-enabled AR glasses and VR headsets go mainstream, there is an urgent need to evolve today’s web infrastructure to deliver spatial services to these next-generation devices. The race is on to establish the open standards required to make this transition possible at scale. Just as the early web depended on foundational standards to succeed, the spatial internet faces the same challenge. The opportunity lies in building on existing web standards while developing essential new protocols and APIs.

The Metaverse Standards Forum and RP1 are addressing this challenge by launching the Open Metaverse Browser Initiative, an open-source effort to build the foundation for how the world will access spatial services.

The Evolution of the Web

Just as the web browser unlocked the World Wide Web by providing universal access to information on 2D devices, the metaverse browser will unlock proximity-based services across AR and virtual environments without installing separate apps for each service.

The metaverse is the evolution of the World Wide Web, bringing spatial computing to the same open, standards-based foundation that made the web successful.

What This Looks Like

Walk into an airport wearing smart glasses. Instantly, you’ll see a route to your gate overlaid on the floor in front of you. Your flight status floats above your departure gate. Security wait times appear as you approach checkpoints. When you arrive at your gate, the airline’s check-in interface appears automatically. You select your seat from a 3D visualization of the plane. Meanwhile, a colleague in another city joins you virtually, their avatar standing beside you for a quick meeting before your flight.

None of this will require installing apps. Each service will activate automatically based on your location. The airport provides navigation, the airline provides check-in, your company provides communication tools. All working together seamlessly in your view, then disappearing as you move to new locations.

This is how the metaverse works: multiple services from different providers appearing automatically based on where you are and what you need.

The AOL Moment

The XR industry today resembles the early 1990s internet, fragmented into incompatible proprietary platforms. We’re in another “AOL moment.” Just as walled gardens gave way to the open web, today’s proprietary XR platforms will evolve into an open metaverse built on universal standards.

A standards-based metaverse browser connects any device to any spatial service, giving organizations the ability to own and operate their spatial presence just like hosting a website today. Open standards create full data ownership, revenue control, and freedom to build without dependence on any platform or gatekeeper.

How do we get the standards we need before fragmentation becomes locked in?

RP1 has developed an operational prototype metaverse browser that connects to immersive 3D content and third-party services across any device, on demand, in real time. RP1 is contributing this prototype to seed an open-source project under the stewardship of the Metaverse Standards Forum, a collaborative non-profit bringing together more than 2,500 member companies and leading standards organizations.

The initiative will be hosted on GitHub under a permissive open-source license, enabling broad industry contributions and providing a functional testbed for exercising and validating interoperability standards.

“Open standards are a powerful foundation for transformative platforms, and RP1 has given us an extraordinary head start to create not just a browser implementation, but a testbed for interoperability collaboration,” said Neil Trevett, president of the Metaverse Standards Forum. “We invite the standards community to join the initiative and leverage this mutual opportunity to drive the evolution and widespread adoption of their standards.”

“The metaverse and XR industry is fragmented and proprietary. A standards-based metaverse browser is the way forward and the Metaverse Standards Forum was custom built to foster this kind of industry-wide cooperation,” said Sean Mann, co-founder and CEO of RP1. “Industry and academic interest in this project has been overwhelming, and we welcome all interested parties to get involved.”

Join Us

This is a call to the entire standards community: standards development organizations with expertise in web, networking, 3D, spatial, and XR technologies; implementers ready to build, test, and validate emerging specifications; enterprises planning spatial infrastructure who want a seat at the table; and developers and researchers passionate about spatial technologies.

Early participants will shape the project’s direction, structure, and deliverables. The initiative will use proven, transparent open-source governance welcoming contributions from all. Organizations are encouraged to join the Metaverse Standards Forum for a voice in the project and broader Working Group activities.

The post Metaverse Standards Forum and RP1 Create the Open Metaverse Browser Initiative – Join Us in Building the Next Open Ecosystem appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

Editor Dylan Fox, Director of Operations, XR Access

Executive Summary

This project, conducted in collaboration with XR Access and the Metaverse Standards Forum (MSF), investigates why accessibility in eXtended Reality (XR) often breaks down between intention and execution—and what tools or systems could help bridge that gap. As XR technologies evolve, ensuring accessibility requires not just awareness, but practical, embedded support that fits real-world workflows.

Interviews with XR creators and accessibility specialists revealed several core challenges: accessibility is often introduced too late in the process due to deadline pressure or lack of ownership, while existing standards like WCAG are viewed as too complex or web-centric for immersive environments. Teams also lack integrated tools for testing and interpreting accessibility. There is limited shared language or structure for communicating accessibility needs across disciplines.

In response, I designed a guideline interface prototype (Figure 1) that makes guidelines easier to understand, filter, and apply. The interface allows users to explore categorized guidance based on user ability, platform, or team role, and presents success criteria, practical examples, and implementation tips in a clear, accessible layout. It aims to shift accessibility from a static checklist to an active, usable reference for inclusive XR design.

Figure 1: Guidelines Interface Prototype

Goal

To explore how accessibility is currently approached in XR design and development, identify the barriers teams face in applying guidelines, and propose a solution that makes those guidelines easier to find, interpret, and implement in practice.

Research

I conducted 19 semi-structured interviews with a total of 21 participants:

• 10 XR creators (X1 – X10) — including designers, developers, creative technologists, and product managers working in spatial computing, XR platforms, and immersive content.
• 11 accessibility specialists (A1 – A11) — including consultants, researchers, advocates, and testers with deep experience in disability access, inclusive design, and policy.

Interviews lasted 45–60 minutes and focused on:

• How accessibility currently fits into XR workflows (if at all)
• How teams interpret and apply accessibility guidance
• What tools, processes, or roles support (or hinder) inclusive outcomes
• Where responsibility and decision-making around accessibility actually sits

The goal was not just to collect pain points, but to understand the underlying systems and team dynamics shaping accessibility efforts in XR. The interview script can be found in Appendix A.

Analysis

I used a structured way using a thematic matrix to present insights from stakeholder interviews (see Figure 2). By grouping similar responses, it highlights recurring themes across participants and brings attention to key challenges and opportunities in XR accessibility. This approach also allows for a clear comparison between the perspectives of XR creators and accessibility specialists. The sticky notes are color-coded to reflect the tone of participant quotes—red for negative, green for positive, and yellow for neutral or factual statements. This visual system helps quickly identify emotional cues and patterns across themes.

Figure 2: Thematic matrix mapping participant quotes by stakeholder group and theme. Full text of sticky notes is available in Appendix B.

Key themes that emerged from this analysis include:

• Approaches to Accessibility – Differences in when and how accessibility is integrated into XR development.
• Challenges Faced – Technical, organizational, and knowledge barriers limiting accessibility implementation.
• Existing Guidelines – The role of current accessibility standards, their limitations, and their applicability to XR.
• Perceived Need for XR Accessibility Guidelines – The demand for structured resources, toolkits, and platform-level solutions.

High v/s Low Priority Approaches to Accessibility

Participants showed a clear divide in when accessibility is prioritized. Some teams incorporate it early in the design process, treating it as foundational.

“You really want to think about accessibility before you start design because accessibility is pretty much impossible to retrofit.” – X9

“I think accessibility is not something that you can incorporate towards the end. It’s something you start working with from the very beginning.” – X3

Others, however, approach accessibility reactively—only addressing it post-launch due to client demands, limited resources, or lack of awareness.

“A lot of that type of stuff gets deprioritized because, you know, we can barely make the thing as is, let alone add the accessibility, hitting the deadline.” – X7

XR creators in particular admitted to deprioritizing accessibility under deadline pressure or due to insufficient knowledge, while accessibility specialists expressed frustration with this approach.

“It’s not that they’re not doing it because they don’t like disabled people. It’s that they just didn’t think about it.” – X9

Only a few participants reported consistently integrating accessibility from the beginning.

“Someone should be [responsible for accessibility].” – X7

Insight: Many teams treat accessibility as an afterthought due to deadlines, resource constraints, or lack of awareness.

Systematic Lack of Technical and Organizational Support

Teams face both technical and organizational barriers when trying to implement accessibility. Many lack dedicated accessibility roles, making ownership unclear.

“The roles and responsibilities are not clarified when it comes to accessibility between, like, all the different roles.” – A2

“We don’t necessarily have a dedicated accessibility engineer… we mix it into the normal engineering process.” – X6

Tools and engines often don’t support accessible design out of the box, and cross-platform conflicts further complicate implementation. Some features were added by accident rather than intention, pointing to a lack of systematic processes. Testing with users is limited for most participants, and criteria for cognitive accessibility remain especially unclear, as noted by multiple accessibility specialists.

Insight: Lack of ownership and tooling leads to fragmented and inconsistent accessibility efforts.

Need for Clear and Practical XR Guidelines

Participants widely agreed that existing guidelines like WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) are too complex and web-centric to apply cleanly to XR.

“WCAG is just so obtuse to try to read, you have to really understand accessibility to even interpret it.” – A7

While some teams attempt to use WCAG, many prefer internal, informal standards based on WCAG but are easier to act on. There’s a general understanding that guidelines are necessary, but their current form is often overwhelming or impractical.

“We’ll probably need something like how WCAG works for traditional websites.” – X2

“Unreal and Unity have accessibility guidelines… but nothing that pulls everything together.” – A1

Several noted that requirements often overlap or feel ambiguous in XR contexts. Testing was emphasized even when formal standards weren’t followed closely.

“There needs to be testing. There’s no substitute.” – X7

Insight: Teams need simpler, XR-specific guidelines that are actionable and not web-centric.

Appetite for Built-in Testing and System-Level Tools

There is strong demand for XR-specific accessibility resources that are easier to use, more visual, and context-aware. Participants requested interactive guides, code examples, and toolkits tailored to their development environments.

“Having a more standardized way of labeling things for non-developers would be really helpful.” – A4

Some suggested TLDRs or cheat sheets to lower the barrier to understanding. Several emphasized that guidelines should be built into platforms and tools, not left as external references.

“I think putting more focus on platform-level or native-level accessibility is needed” – X6

A universal, agreed-upon standard was seen as ideal but difficult to achieve. Many participants emphasized that accessibility challenges go beyond just tools and standards—it’s a multifaceted issue with no final fix.

“Accessibility will never be a ‘solved problem’.” – A9

Insight: There’s strong demand for native, easy-to-use accessibility tools within XR platforms. 

Analysis Summary

Tensions between XR creators and accessibility specialists often stemmed from differing expectations—creators favored built-in tools and ready-made solutions that could help them solve accessibility challenges swiftly, whereas accessibility specialists wanted clear, testable criteria that could make it easier to evaluate and audit XR experiences.

Both groups agreed that current tools are lacking, guidelines are insufficient, and that testing with real users is essential. There was a shared recognition that accessibility needs to be better communicated and embedded across workflows. Business priorities and tight timelines frequently push accessibility to the background. Overall, participants supported having clearer responsibilities, more intuitive resources, and built-in infrastructure support.

Guidelines Interface Prototype

Purpose & Context

The guidelines prototype was designed to help designers, developers, and testers explore XR accessibility guidelines more easily. It addresses key challenges surfaced in stakeholder interviews, including the lack of a central resource, confusion around responsibilities, and the complexity of existing standards like WCAG.

Design References & Benchmarks

As part of the early research and benchmarking process, I looked closely at existing accessibility resources to understand how guidance is currently structured and delivered. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) offered a comprehensive but often overwhelming model. Its sidebar-based structure (Figure 3) was helpful for organizing large volumes of information, but its technical depth and web-specific framing made it difficult to translate into XR contexts.

Figure 3: Screenshot of the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2. Guidelines are split into individual testable accessibility criteria.

The Game Accessibility Guidelines (GAG), in contrast, adopt a more approachable tone, presenting recommendations as clear, actionable statements (Figure 4). While GAG loosely categorizes guidelines by ability (e.g., visual, motor, cognitive), it lacks a structured way to search or filter through them, which limits discoverability when applied in practical contexts. This lack of navigability echoed feedback from participants, several of whom described the current state of accessibility guidance as “scattered” or “hard to interpret in context.”

Figure 4: Screenshot of the Game Accessibility Guidelines, showing sample accessibility solutions that could potentially support gamers with different disabilities.

References to resources for existing platforms like Unity’s accessibility package and Meta’s accessibility principles were also reviewed, but fragmented structures and lack of detailed resources in those sources validated the need for something more cohesive and informative.

Interface Prototype

To address the gaps surfaced through interviews and benchmarking, I designed a guidelines interface prototype that reframes guidelines in a more structured, approachable, and role-aware format. The goal was to make accessibility guidance easier to find, understand, and apply within real XR development workflows.

Structure & Categorization

The interface offers two primary ways of navigating guidelines:

• By Principle – Grouped according to stages or functions within an XR experience (e.g., Setup, Understand, Navigate).
• By Ability – Grouped by disability categories such as Vision, Hearing, Motor, Cognitive, and Cross-modal.

Guidelines were intentionally allowed to appear in multiple groups to support flexible discovery. Additional filters include Role (e.g., designer, developer, tester) and Platform, acknowledging gaps in responsibility awareness and platform-specific implementation issues raised during interviews.

Navigation & Interaction

Users can toggle between Ability and Principle tabs, which restructure the list of guidelines accordingly. They can also use the universal search bar to find guidelines by keyword. Filters are positioned above the content area, making them contextually visible and directly connected to the guideline list. Clicking a guideline opens a detailed view, with title, description, success criteria, accessibility relevance, and examples.

A future-facing feature includes a chat-based AI assistant, envisioned to help users ask questions and interpret guidelines more easily—especially when unsure how to apply them.

Design Iteration

The initial layout followed a three-panel grid with filters on the left, a list of guidelines in the center, and detailed content on the right (see Figure 5). However, during informal reviews and walkthroughs, it became clear that the placement of filters in a side panel made it less obvious that they were directly connected to the list of guidelines. Users didn’t intuitively associate the filters with the content they were viewing, which affected usability and discoverability.

Figure 5: Initial prototype with a 3-column structure

To address this, the layout was restructured with filters positioned above the guideline list, making their function more contextually visible and clearly tied to the content. Tabs were also introduced to switch between categorization types (by Ability and by Principle), keeping the interaction simple and reducing visual clutter.

The final prototype (Figure 6) presents a cleaner, wiki-style interface that enables XR creators to browse, filter, and understand accessibility guidelines more effectively. A dedicated section “How it helps different disabilities” was included to help creators understand the impact of each guideline, encouraging more empathetic and informed decision-making.

Figure 6: Annotated prototype highlighting core features of the interface.

Known Limitations

• Some users may want to select multiple abilities, which points to Ability potentially being better as a filter than a categorization.
• Edge case handling (e.g., filtering out a currently visible guideline) needs further definition.
• The prototype has not been user tested, and feedback from actual users is essential before making decisions about implementation.

Next Steps

This research uncovered clear gaps in how accessibility guidelines are understood, accessed, and implemented in XR workflows. The guidelines interface prototype is a foundational step toward creating a more usable, structured, and role-aware guideline system — but additional layers of exploration are needed.

Moving forward, we could:

• Validate the IA and prototype through user testing with XR creators and accessibility specialists to ensure real-world relevance.
• Explore development of a shared checklist or reporting tool, enabling teams to track, assign, and document accessibility considerations collaboratively.
• Refine how guidelines are presented, potentially shifting from static content to more interactive formats (e.g., customizable views, decision trees, AI-supported interpretation).
•  Build a platform-level strategy for how guidelines, infrastructure, and tooling can be better aligned — moving from reactive documentation to embedded support.
• Have a dedicated examples section to help creators find specific examples of what has been done before and how they can approach a particular accessibility issue.
• Continue shaping a unified, XR-specific standard, informed by lived practitioner experiences, that balances technical depth with practical usability.

This work opens a pathway not just for organizing accessibility guidelines more effectively, but for helping teams interpret and apply them with greater clarity and confidence. As the MSF continues its work on developing standardized accessibility guidelines for XR, this research offers valuable insight into how different stakeholder groups navigate, understand, and act on accessibility guidance. The prototype provides a foundation for structuring and presenting guidelines in ways that are actionable across roles.

Conclusion

This research highlights the real-world gap between the intent to build accessible XR experiences and the barriers that make it difficult in practice. While many XR creators value inclusion, challenges like unclear guidelines, time constraints, and limited collaboration with accessibility experts often get in the way.

The prototype developed as part of this work offers a starting point to address some of these gaps. By organizing existing guidelines in a clearer, more navigable format and explicitly highlighting the roles and responsibilities, it supports creators in making accessibility decisions earlier and more confidently in their workflows. While still exploratory, it lays the groundwork for future iterations and conversations, acting as both a baseline and a provocation for rethinking how accessibility guidance is delivered and used in XR. There’s still much to be done but building shared understanding and tools like these can help push the industry toward more inclusive and sustainable design practices.

Appendix A: Interview Script

Interview Script: Understanding the current state of accessibility in XR

Stakeholders: XR Creators & A11y testers

Greetings and introduction

Hi <Participant name>, How are you doing today?

Thank you for taking the time to talk to us today!

My name is Mrunmai and I’m a UX researcher at XR Access. My team is working with the Accessibility Working Group of the Metaverse Standards Forum on a project to improve accessibility in XR (virtual and augmented reality) and would love to learn about the challenges you face when creating or testing XR experiences or otherwise evaluating for accessibility. Your insights will help make XR more inclusive for all users.

Please share your honest thoughts as we go along. Do remember, there are no right or wrong answers!

Do you have any questions for me before we get started?

Before we begin, could I just confirm that you’re still okay with this session being recorded? [Wait for reply]

Awesome! I will start the recording now.

Thank you!

Questions

XR Creators

1. Can you tell me a little about your background and experience in XR?
2. What are the types of XR applications you have worked on? (e.g., VR, AR, MR, gaming, training, simulations)
3. What software or tools do you use to design or develop XR experiences?
4. When designing XR experiences, what are the key factors you prioritize?
5. At what stage in the development process do you consider accessibility?
   1. [For Sr Devs] Has that changed over time?
6. When designing/developing XR experiences, have you ever needed to consider accessibility? Was there any incident which prompted that?
   1. Which disabilities have you considered in your designs?
   2. How do you ensure users of different abilities can interact with your applications?
7. Who in your organization is responsible for accessibility? OR Who determines the priority of accessibility-related tasks, and who is responsible for approving accessibility changes?
8. Do you have any internal accessibility guidelines or best practices specific to XR?
9. Are there any people with visible disabilities on your team/in your organization? OR Have you ever worked with users with disabilities when designing an XR experience? What was that process like?
10. Have you ever had to adapt an existing XR experience to make it more accessible? If so, how did you approach it?
11. Can you share a time when making an XR experience accessible was challenging? OR Are there specific technical or design limitations that make accessibility harder to implement in XR?
12. Are there accessibility requirements from clients, stakeholders, or regulations that you have to meet?
13. Are there any accessibility-related design patterns or frameworks you follow?
    1. Have you used any existing accessibility guidelines when designing XR experiences? How helpful or challenging was it?
14. Have you found these guidelines helpful, or do they present any challenges in practical implementation?
15. What would make accessibility easier to integrate into your workflow?
16. How do you typically learn about new best practices or industry standards in XR development?
17. Is accessibility also a part of your QA tests?

Accessibility Testers

1. Can you tell me about your experience with accessibility testing?
2. Have you tested XR applications for accessibility? If yes, which types? (e.g., VR, AR, MR)
   1. What software and hardware do you use for accessibility testing in XR?
   2. Can you describe a recent experience testing an XR product?
      1. How did you determine if it is accessible?
      2. Do you follow any specific accessibility testing guidelines for XR? If yes, which ones?
      3. What are some of the most common accessibility issues you’ve identified in XR applications?
      4. Have you come across any accessibility features in XR that were well-executed?
      5. How do you typically document or report accessibility issues in XR?
      6. Are there any specific disabilities that XR applications often fail to accommodate?
3. What guidelines do you apply regarding accessibility besides WCAG?
   1. What would make your job as an accessibility tester easier when evaluating interfaces and experiences beyond WCAG?
4. Do you use any specific checklist tools for different interfaces (eg: web, mobile, XR, etc)?
   1. Are there any features you really like about those tools?
      1. Is there any tool/feature that you find difficult to use?
5. What do you do when existing accessibility guidelines don’t directly apply to the application you’re testing?
6. Is accessibility also a part of your QA tests?
7. If you could change one thing about the way accessibility is handled today, what would it be?

Closing/Thank you

These are all my questions for today!

Thank you so much for participating in this screening session. Your opinions and suggestions are important and will help us improve the accessibility in XR interfaces.

Ask if they want to join mailing list:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdZxYGXzfZumj_1xRu0J1V7gG3PLmCDj2GC8pB8SMAQB9rDRA/viewform

Is there anything else you’d like to add or any questions you have for us at this point?

Awesome! Thank you again for your participation and sharing your opinions. Have a great day!

Appendix B: Full Quotes and Insights

Figure B1: Thematic matrix mapping participant quotes by stakeholder group and theme. The sticky notes are color-coded to reflect the tone of participant quotes—red indicates negative sentiments or challenges, green highlights positive experiences or opinions, and yellow represents neutral or factual statements.

Approach to Accessibility

Challenges Faced

Guidelines and Standards

Perceived Need for XR-specific Accessibility Guidelines

The post Good Intentions, Real Barriers: Investigating Accessibility in XR Workflows appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

The Metaverse Standards Forum is proud to announce the launch of its Forum Labs Initiative — a major new program designed to accelerate open cooperation and interoperability through grounded, high-impact Collaborative Projects.
As the metaverse ecosystem evolves, so does the need for real-world testing and validation of emerging standards. The Forum Labs Initiative empowers qualified member organizations to lead and participate in Collaborative Projects that span both pre-standardization exploration and post-standardization deployment — ensuring that standards development is shaped by practical experience and ready for real-world adoption.

What Is a Forum Principal Lab?

A Forum Principal Lab is a designated Principal Member with the expertise, infrastructure, and commitment to support and execute Collaborative Projects in close collaboration with Forum Working Groups. These labs play a critical role in bridging the gap between concept and deployment, providing hands-on insight and technical depth.

What Can Collaborative Projects Include?

Collaborative Projects under the Forum Labs Initiative are designed to deliver tangible, ecosystem-wide impact. Example activities include:

• Defining and testing use cases and technical requirements
• Running interoperability testbeds and plugfests
• Co-hosting webinars, workshops, and symposia
• Collaborating on grant-funded R&D proposals
• Developing and validating open tooling and resources

By enabling both early-stage exploration and testing of real-world implementations, the program helps keep metaverse standards development practical and grounded in deployment experience.

Why It Matters

For the Ecosystem: The program strengthens the foundation of the open metaverse by enabling standards to be tested, refined, and adopted in real-world conditions — increasing reliability, reducing fragmentation, and accelerating time to impact.

For Labs: Forum Principal Labs gain unique opportunities to demonstrate leadership, enhance visibility, collaborate with key stakeholders, and contribute to shaping the future of metaverse interoperability.

For the Forum: The program expands the Forum’s capacity to turn strategic goals into operational momentum — helping fulfill its mission to catalyze open and inclusive metaverse standards.

p-NET Designated as First Forum Principal Lab

p-NET has been designated as the first Forum Principal Lab under the Forum’s new initiative. Established in 2022 through a collaboration between the University of Patras, private and public sector partners, and Greece’s General Secretariat for Research and Innovation, p-NET focuses on advancing 5G/6G innovation and exploring their applications in immersive technologies.

As the inaugural Forum Principal Lab, p-NET will leverage its state-of-the-art infrastructure and research capabilities to Collaborative Projects that test and validate metaverse interoperability in real-world scenarios. Forum members and global participants will gain access to p-NET’s advanced 5G testbeds and tools — helping bridge standards development with practical, measurable outcomes.

“”The new Metaverse Standards Forum Labs Initiative will help bridge the critical gap between standards development and real-world testing,” said Neil Trevett, Forum President. “We are delighted to welcome p-NET as our first Forum Principal Lab — their advanced 5G/6G infrastructure and expertise in immersive technologies will be invaluable in validating metaverse interoperability standards in practical environments.”

“We foster innovation, entrepreneurship, and technological progress in smart network technologies while promoting digital transformation and sustainability across sectors such as culture and tourism, smart cities, education, media, and public-sector services,” said Marios Nicolaou, BD Director, p-NET. “We’re eager to investigate how interoperability requirements and emerging standards affect user experience and value chains in controlled environments — and to help quantify the benefits of standards adoption.”

Join the Movement

Forum Principal Labs will be recognized on the Forum’s website, granted the use of an official designation, and encouraged to propose and co-lead impactful projects with the Forum and its members. Each project will be guided by a transparent agreement that defines roles, deliverables, and open outcomes — with a strong focus on collaboration, real-world impact, and publicly available results that advance the open metaverse ecosystem.

This program marks a significant step forward in turning interoperability goals into collaborative, measurable progress.

Learn more about the Metaverse Standards Forum and how your organization can become a Forum Principal Lab.

The post Driving Real-World Impact: Metaverse Standards Forum Launches Forum Labs Initiative for Pre- and Post-Standardization Collaboration appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

Introduction

The charter and vision for the 3D Web Interoperability Working Group at the Metaverse Standards Forum is to leverage and extend current web standards to enable the metaverse, as was explained in more detail in our previous blog “Building The World Wide Webiverse.”

This new blog describes the work and the roadmap of the Working Group’s first project: linking and sharing virtual worlds.

Web of Worlds Core Principles

This project to link virtual worlds highlights a compelling analogy between the World Wide Web—a unified system of URL-addressable, interconnected interactive experiences—and what we envision as a cohesive metaverse platform. This platform would consist of numerous addressable and linked spatial experiences, or virtual worlds, collectively forming what we call the “Web of Worlds.” Just as websites create a networked digital ecosystem, these spatial-first experiences would interconnect to create a seamless virtual universe as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: The “‘Web of Worlds” model exposes metaverse worlds as web endpoints

We envision the “Web of Worlds” to be build on the current web infrastructure and support the following core requirements:

1. Unified Addressing System
   • A single URI pointing to each discrete virtual world and functioning as a link between worlds
   • Persistent data references in linked data environments
   • Capability to store URIs/URLs for later access
   • Simple URI sharing with additional users
2. Universal Experience Accessibility
   • The “Web of Worlds” should be accessible through any standard browser
   • Sharing of interactive spatial experiences rather than just isolated 3D data assets
   • Web app-controlled user experiences as the dominant delivery model, i.e., use of client data vs. remote rendering
3. Rich Spatial Experiences
   • Comprehensive user experiences for spatial data of any composition and size
   • Support for both static and dynamic spatial data composition
   • Capability to handle billions of addressable spatial data states
   • High visual efficiency and fidelity
4. Collaborative Environment
   • Seamless shared multi-user and multi-device scenarios
   • Support for mixed and dynamic user and device configurations e.g., desktop, mobile, and immersive devices
   • World-agnostic user identification and data authentication (e.g., SSO)

Linking to a virtual world as an endpoint can provide a unified API to expose standard concepts such as users, views, and spatial content. The endpoint API should include functions to join, view, and preview the world in a standard browser/user agent for a given user. Modern web app techniques, including adaptive and responsive frameworks that react to device and network requirements, can be applied to create widely accessible rich user experiences in the browser.

We can see examples of this pattern across the Web today in Single-Page Applications (SPAs) and Web Apps, such as Google Docs, where the user, state, and history are all identified on the URL. So, what information would be essential to represent on a metaverse experience endpoint? Our investigation into use cases will help us enumerate requirements.

Initial Requirements for Web of Worlds

We propose the following requirements for the Web of Worlds model:

• Composition of world experiences from multiple assets and endpoints
• Ability to jump to predefined viewpoints in worlds
• Creation and sharing of new viewpoints
• Provision of a preview of the experience before entering
• Experience consistency, e.g., in view and navigation parameters, units, physics
• Security, e.g., protection against Man in the Middle attacks

Opportunity: Building on Web API standards for Web of Worlds

To meet these requirements, we propose the following strategy:

• Build on existing Web and HTTP/HTTPS stack and standards
  • Providing a single URL endpoint for each addressable world
  • E.g. “http://example.com/superverse/395844”
• Enable opening the URL in a user agent to join the world as an interactive experience
  • Automatic user ID controlled join/rejoin management
  • Web-App controlled IO/data/pixel flow
    • e.g., Local data vs remote rendering
  • Existing users & views should be addressable
    • e.g., “superverse/395844/user/983”
• Optionally open the URL in a user agent to preview the world
  • No additional user created, but user-based authorization needed
  • Web-App controlled IO/data/pixel flow
  • Existing users/views should be addressable
• Optionally expose scene state as model data
  • Including external links, using multiple asset standards, e.g., X3D, USD, glTF

Extending Web Patterns and Possibilities

With today’s HTML, glTF, and X3D standards, we can already compose rich interactive online 3D experiences[1]. We expect to build and extend on these Web patterns:

• Composing and modifying 3D scenes: live HTML editing of X3D + glTF:
  • X3DOM live editor
  • X_ITE live editor
  • DOM control of glTF through X3D
• Experience fragment API / Bookmarks example (X3D + glTF):
  • Preview and jump to views in worlds; create and share new views
  • Can be expanded to meet our “Metaverse Bookmarks” use case

Outlook and Roadmap

We invite Metaverse Standards Forum members to provide feedback and evaluations of this proposal. Forum members can provide use cases and requirements and evaluate and test this API specification as it undergoes prototyping towards potential standardization. Prototypes can be implemented with several engines in the ecosystem today, and one potential path for standardization is through the Web3D Consortium and ISO/IEC[2] (along with its SDO Liaisons at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC), and the Khronos Group), which can develop a specification for this functionality as a URL/URI API.

Join us!

The Forum is open for any organization to join – we welcome your participation in the Working Group to explore and evolve metaverse open standards for the 3D Web!

References

1. Integrating X3D and glTF Blog from the Web3D Consortium
2. ISO/IEC X3Dv4 supports glTF 2.0, WebAudio, and MIDI
3. X3D the HTML way

Blog by the 3D Web Interoperability Domain Group of the Metaverse Standards Forum

The post Linked Spatial Experiences: The Web of Worlds appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

3D Web Interoperability Working Group Vision

The Metaverse Standards Forum’s mission is to foster and guide the development of interoperability standards that will drive the newly emerging spatial web. By providing a collaborative venue for stakeholders, the Forum enables knowledge exchange and the development of interoperable practices that support innovation across the metaverse ecosystem.

The work of the Forum is divided between member-driven Working Groups with specific expertise, experience and interests. The Forum’s 3D Web Interoperability Working Group aims to transform the web into a spatial, immersive realm that is seamless, efficient, engaging, safe and fun for all: ‘The World Wide Webiverse’.

• Our goal is to run the open metaverse on the web
• Our strategy is to influence the evolution of interoperable web standards
• Our tactics include driving consensus through the generation and analysis of key use cases, and analysing gaps in the standardization landscape
• Our priorities are seamless authoring and linking of experiences, and efficient client/server communication.

It has been an incredible first 18 months for the 3D Web Working Group, which has been diligently developing key guidelines and recommendations on how to position the web as the heart of the open metaverse. We are excited to share our progress with you!

The Power of the Open Web and Webiverse

With capable technologies already present throughout the web stack—from the user interface through to access to underlying silicon acceleration—this is an exciting time. The industry has the opportunity to chart a sustainable roadmap for evolving spatial web standards through education and cooperation.

Our motivating question is:

“Can we build the Metaverse on Web standards and technology?”

Our answer is ‘YES’!

• The web is composed of multiple URL-addressable and linked interactive experiences called web pages.
• Similarly, the metaverse will comprise multiple addressable and linked interactive and spatial experiences called virtual worlds.

It is important to recognize the enabling power of the open approach to the web, and its foundational design philosophy of building on a diversity of open standards. This is in contrast to a closed approach, relying on proprietary formats and protocols, that lacks the multiplicative networking benefit of a platform that is equally open to all. It has taken decades of creativity, time, and money to build the broad recognition that no single company owns the web or the metaverse.

The openness and scalability of the Web are well-known; indeed, we have seen decades of innovation in composing and delivering on-demand 2D and 3D content and media. Today, the web is omnipresent. Every address (URL/URI) is an entry point into a new data aspect (information space) composed of linked documents and composed API services. This transformative approach to related documents and information services of the web offers proven signposts for the future metaverse.

Thanks to bona fide Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) and open source communities worldwide, open technology solutions to design challenges almost always exist. The web and metaverse are emergent properties resulting from the compounding value of interoperability through proven conformance to standard specifications. Value and innovation happen on top of standards and within an ecosystem. These lessons are articulated and visible in technical communities and SDOs such as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the Web3D Consortium, the Khronos Group, and the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC).

Expanding the Web from 2D to 3D

In the modern Web, users can access rich information and multimedia from many sources, some closed and some open. For example, standards like SSO/OAUTH, enable users to surf across rich experiences and join with various identities across several different devices. With User Agents for the client, and content negotiation on the server side, the Web is moving from rich documents and MIME types to Web Services and WebApps.

As we move from the 2D to the 3D web, using URL/URIs, linked experiences can be composed and traversed dynamically. We explicitly refer to linked content and experiences, rather than ‘assets’ or files, which invoke the more traditional document-centric view. Mashups are a powerful feature of the Web where standards like HTML and X3D can be used to build multimedia experiences from distributed 3D models (e.g., glTF assets), images, video, and audio on the Web.

It is no small achievement to converge declarative and imperative standards, and now the Web provides the plumbing to work with stateful applications through URLs/URIs. Figure 1 shows how this transition from 2D web documents to 3D web apps can start today, with recognizable, shipping technologies.

Figure 1: The modern Web continuum from 2D addressable documents to data-driven, in-flight 3D content

As we build the standards for the Webiverse – there are still many vital aspects worthy of definition and debate. For example, what level of ‘Immersion’ is required for the metaverse? (very little). Or is it actually ‘Presence’ that matters? (yes). Is it a metaverse if there is only one person? (no, we believe that multiple users with ‘co-Presence’ is a necessary condition). These deep questions are important when considering who we are building the metaverse for and why.

As we enumerate the requirements of the metaverse, we can also take lessons from the shortcomings and failures of today’s web. Most notably, there are privacy and ethical concerns that we do not recreate the problems of Web 2.0, especially the security and privacy issues that vex companies, governments, and consumers alike.

Working Group Scope and Process

The Forum’s 3D Web Interoperability Working Group is focused on how to leverage and extend existing web standards to enable the metaverse, and is following a well-defined and rigorous process:

1. After our Working Group Charter was approved by the Forum Oversight Committee, we first developed a set of scenarios focused on the metaverse and the 3D Web. Together, these illustrate many user requirements: consistency of experience, portable personal content, metaverse bookmarks. We also considered use cases such as virtual field trips, and safety simulations.
2. We then conducted a Technology Pattern Inventory – examining current and emerging Web and interactive 3D Standards. We hosted guest speakers and presentations, including updates from the W3C, Web3D, Khronos, and MPEG standards organizations.
3. The last step was a Gap Analysis, which contrasted the requirements from our use cases, which led us to scope our first projects for the group’s work agenda and roadmap.
4. This work continues to evolve as Forum stakeholders and Working Group members bring their requirements and use cases to the cross-cutting perspective of web standards—that examines issues, themes, or problems across different domains, disciplines, and categories, rather than viewing them in isolation.

Working Group Roadmap

As the Working Group work continues, we will evolve and refine additional use cases from Forum members, feeding a user-centered design process that ensures we are solving industry-relevant problems. Specifically, our use cases illustrate the requirements by which we can evaluate evolving standards. For example:

1. Mechanisms to link and reference complete or partial virtual worlds
   Problem Statement: use cases demonstrate various ways to link virtual and physical worlds. How can we distinguish these modes and their requirements?
2. Functional profiles for metaverse applications – content interoperability
   Problem Statement: 3D scenes are built from various resources, from geometry and materials to lighting, sensors, and rich content models. How can we define levels of 3D functionality?
3. Role-based access and encryption of assets
   Problem Statement: the metaverse must include capabilities for both network and data security. What standards and options govern these? What are their limitations? How does the metaverse infrastructure enable trust, ownership, previewing, and monetization?
4. 3D User Agent investigation
   Problem Statement: a user agent is software that interprets a text string from a Web server on behalf of the user. What capabilities could be added to the user agent to enable an accessible metaverse?
5. Efficient delivery of 3D experiences
   Problem Statement: how to review and evaluate the current solutions for delivering 3D assets and experiences (X3D, glTF, 3DTiles, USDz) and how to identify gaps and requirements.
   More detailed thinking on linking and sharing virtual worlds is explored by the Working Group in the next blog in this series “Linked Spatial Experiences: The Web of Worlds.”

Join us!

The Forum is open for any organization to join – we welcome your participation in the working group to explore and evolve Metaverse open standards for the 3D Web!

The post Building The World Wide Webiverse appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

Gaussian Splats are an innovative method for representing 3D scenes using points (or “splats”) with attributes like color, opacity, and size. This technique enables highly realistic renderings with fewer data constraints compared to traditional mesh models.

The Forum’s Gaussian Splats Town Hall, co-hosted by MSF 3D Formats Interoperability Working Group co-chair Patrick Cozzi of Bentley Systems and Alexey Medvedev of Meta, who also serves as Khronos 3D Formats Working Group chair, was a dynamic, three-and-a-half-hour event that featured impressive demonstrations and persuasive arguments for GS’s future in 3D content creation and delivery. Notable contributors included Radiance Fields, The New York Times, Niantic, Meta, NVIDIA, PlayCanvas, Microsoft, Arrival.space, Waldek Technologies, Bentley Systems, Cesium, Hexagon, Esri, EARTHBRAIN, and JDULTRA.

The recording of Part 1 is now available, complete with bookmarks for easy navigation. As GS gains momentum, we also want to elevate the standardization discussion that emerged from the town hall and bring glTF stakeholders rapidly up to speed before the next event.
What Does “Standardization Ready” mean?

Permanent link to this comic: https://xkcd.com/927/

Timing is everything in standardization. Premature efforts risk stifling innovation, while waiting too long can lead to fragmented proprietary technologies. The sweet spot is when a technology’s utility is proven, and the absence of standards starts to hinder growth.

This town hall focused on determining where Gaussian Splatting stands on this spectrum. Are we still in the early days of experimentation, or is the technology mature enough to benefit from standardization? And if it’s time, what should that process look like?

Growing Momentum for Gaussian Splatting

Presenters highlighted a rapid surge in GS adoption across industries, demonstrating its versatility and accelerating momentum. AJ Chavar from The New York Times illustrated how Gaussian Splats are enabling immersive, interactive storytelling with rich visual fidelity while maintaining minimal data overhead, crucial for fast-loading online content.

Nicholas Butko from Niantic showcased GS’s efficient rendering capabilities on mobile devices, emphasizing its ability to deliver smooth augmented reality experiences even on resource-constrained hardware. He also discussed Niantic’s Scaniverse app, a free and open-source tool that has significantly contributed to the growing adoption of GS. By enabling users to easily capture high-quality 3D scans using a mobile device and convert them into GS-based representations, Scaniverse has lowered the barrier to entry for creators and developers looking to experiment with and implement Gaussian Splats in their projects. Butko highlighted how Scaniverse’s streamlined workflow and intuitive interface have helped accelerate GS adoption across various industries, particularly in augmented reality applications.

Additionally, Michael Rubloff from Radiance Fields discussed how radiance field assets align with game engine physics, demonstrating integration with platforms like Unity and Unreal Engine. Nemanja Bartolovic and Ashish Singh from Meta (Cloud-AI, RL) highlighted their work optimizing GS for mobile GPU architectures, focusing on techniques to reduce memory bandwidth usage and enhance performance in resource-constrained environments like the Meta Quest. Nicolas Moenne-Loccoz from NVIDIA presented strategies for decoupling 3D Gaussians from specific rendering techniques, allowing for greater flexibility in how splats are visualized across different platforms and devices.These examples underscored GS’s ability to support high-quality visuals, efficient rendering across platforms, and adaptability for various industries, including journalism, augmented reality, and digital entertainment.

GS on the Web

The town hall also dove deep into GS web applications, highlighting its versatility for real-time use cases. Will Eastcott from PlayCanvas demonstrated how GS enhances real-time collaboration by enabling dynamic virtual spaces for education and remote work, where users can interact seamlessly within rich, interactive 3D environments. Cedric Guillemet from Microsoft showcased how GS improves the efficiency of rendering complex web-based scenes, making it possible to achieve high levels of detail without compromising performance. Thomas Richter-Trummer from Arrival.Space presented real-world applications where GS allowed for the scalable display of large 3D datasets directly in browsers, significantly reducing load times. Yoshiharu Sato from Waldek Technologies explored how GS supports immersive web applications, focusing on its ability to handle intricate data structures while maintaining smooth user experiences.

Despite these advancements, the presenters acknowledged challenges such as optimizing data compression techniques and ensuring consistent performance across different browsers. Ongoing collaboration within the community aims to address these hurdles and refine GS’s integration with web technologies.

Geospatial and Digital Twins

In geospatial and digital twin contexts, GS supports precise, high-resolution mapping, allowing for detailed representations of physical environments. Renaud Keriven from Bentley Systems demonstrated how GS could accurately capture and visualize complex infrastructure projects, including fine details like power lines, wires, or telecom towers, reducing the time needed for site assessments. The acquisition and processing of GS are more flexible than traditional photogrammetry. Data can be captured using anything from a simple smartphone video to georeferenced drone or aerial imagery. Processing ranges from a quick draft reconstruction to a more computationally expensive but high-quality, large-scale reconstruction.

Jason Sobotka from Cesium illustrated its capability in managing large-scale geospatial datasets, showcasing a real-time urban environment visualization that integrated dynamic traffic data seamlessly. This efficiency in data visualization makes it easier to interpret complex datasets, particularly in industries like urban planning and environmental monitoring.

Ladislav Horký from Hexagon discussed how meshes and point clouds could be used together, taking advantage of both the visual fidelity of a mesh and the fine structural details of a point cloud. His presentation demonstrated how point clouds can enable smoother performance and real-time data integration to enhance the responsiveness of digital twins.

Despite these benefits, challenges persist. Konrad Wenzel from Esri noted difficulties in standardizing coordinate systems across different platforms, while Jean-Philippe Pons pointed out the complexities in managing the vast amounts of data generated, both of which require further exploration and innovative solutions.

Are Gaussian Splats Standardization Ready?

The town hall revealed diverse perspectives on whether the industry is ready for GS standards. Pro-standardization voices advocated for leveraging existing frameworks like glTF to streamline GS adoption while maintaining flexibility. For instance, presenters from Cesium and NVIDIA highlighted how integrating GS with glTF could simplify workflows for digital twins and 3D mapping applications, enabling seamless data exchange across platforms.

Scott Simons from OGC offered a guiding principle during the global Q&A session: “The best way to standardize problems is really to find discrete pieces of those problems and solve them as those need to be solved.” In other words, stay niche. Simons suggested leveraging existing standards such as glTF that already address core aspects of GS use cases and building out extensions to address tailored user needs. This insight set the stage for a discussion on the right way to implement standards without overreaching.

Many participants suggested that glTF could play a pivotal role in future GS standardization efforts, potentially serving as a container or extension framework. Several speakers highlighted how 3D Tiles, a spatial data structure built on glTF, could enable streaming of massive GS-based scenes. Jason Sobotka from Cesium illustrated how 3D Tiles efficiently manages large-scale geospatial datasets, ensuring optimized delivery of high-resolution data in real-time applications. Konrad Wenzel from Esri reinforced this perspective, explaining how 3D Tiles’ hierarchical level-of-detail system allows GS to be integrated seamlessly into existing geospatial pipelines. Arrival.space also demonstrated how GS assets could be embedded within glTF files to enhance web-based 3D experiences without sacrificing performance or flexibility. These discussions further indicate that glTF, through its connection with 3D Tiles, may serve as a strong foundation for GS standardization, enabling interoperability and scalability across industries.

In addition, Niantic’s presentation introduced their open-source SPZ format for GS and proposed that SPZ could potentially become a glTF extension, following a path similar to Google’s Draco compression. They explained that SPZ is designed to efficiently store and transmit Gaussian Splats, making it a strong candidate for standardization. By leveraging glTF as an extension framework, Niantic suggested that SPZ could achieve rendering efficiencies, overcome challenges with interactivity, and build out metadata like view ranges to improve usability. Their proposal highlights how targeted extensions within established standards can provide practical solutions without overcomplicating the broader ecosystem.

Still, cautionary viewpoints emphasized the risk of stifling innovation if standards are imposed prematurely. Experts from Meta and PlayCanvas cautioned that GS is still evolving rapidly, with diverse experimental implementations that could be restricted by premature standardization.

Back on the pro-standardization camp, one should note that standards development is not a fast process. Getting started might not be such a bad idea and new technologies, which will inevitably arise, can always be incorporated.

Join the GS Conversation

The town hall demonstrated that the conversation around GS is far from over. Indeed, discussion continues on the event’s dedicated Discord, and the town hall will reconvene on March 5 at 9:30 AM PST.

If you’re interested in following the debate and weighing in, join the dedicated conversation on the Metaverse Standards Forum Discord. Members and non-members are welcome: by adding your voice, you can help ensure the industry hits the standardization sweet spot for this critical emerging technology.

Metaverse Standards Forum Gaussian Splats Town Hall Part 1 Speakers:

Hosts

Patrick Cozzi, Chief Platform Officer, Bentley Systems
Alexey Medvedev, AR Tech Lead at Meta and Chair of the Khronos 3D Formats Working Group

Presenters

• Foundations

  • Michael Rubloff, Founder and Managing Editor, Radiance Fields
  • Aras Pranckevičius, Programmer
  • A.J. Chavar, Creative Strategist & Nick Bartzokas, Senior Software Engineer – R&D The New York Times

• Momentum

  • Nicholas Butko, Senior Director, Engineering, Niantic, Inc.
  • Nemanja Bartolovic, Software Engineer & Ashish Singh, Product Management, Cloud-AI, RL-Meta
  • Nicolas Moenne-Loccoz, Principal Research Engineer, ADLR, NVIDIA

• Web

  • Will Eastcott, CEO & Co-founder, PlayCanvas
  • Cedric Guillemet, Senior Software Development Engineer, Microsoft
  • Thomas Richter-Trummer, Co-Founder & CTO, Arrival.Space
  • Yoshiharu Sato, Founder & CTO, Waldek Technologies

• Geospatial & Digital Twins

  • Renaud Keriven, Distinguished Engineer, Bentley Systems
  • Jason Sobotka, Software Engineer, Cesium
  • Ladislav Horký, CTO at Melown Technologies, Hexagon
  • Konrad Wenzel, Director, Stuttgart R&D Center and Jean-Philippe Pons, Sr. Principal Software Development Engineer, Esri
  • Takayuki Murayama, Senior Director & Talha Khalid, Global Development Manager, EARTHBRAIN
  • Emeric Beaufays, Geospatial and 3D Specialist, Founder & Software Engineer, JDULTRA

The post Have Gaussian Splats Arrived in the Standardization Sweet Spot? appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

As virtual and augmented reality become integral to learning environments, a centralized register of resources, trends, and best practices is essential. This Register aims to support organizations and educators seeking to leverage Metaverse tools for internal training, external educational programs, and skill development. By compiling information from diverse sources, this Register will empower stakeholders to make informed decisions, streamline their approaches, and stay abreast of challenges and emerging trends in Metaverse education. Here, “education and training in the Metaverse” encompasses both instruction conducted within the Metaverse and education about its potential.

Key goals of the Working Group include:

• Developing a comprehensive list of Metaverse training use cases: Cataloging diverse applications of the Metaverse in education to serve as a reference point for educators and organizations.
• Creating a registry of recognized Metaverse-specific educational resources: Compiling high-quality learning materials, platforms, and tools tailored for education.
• Liaising with Metaverse educational providers: Establishing partnerships and networks with leading educational entities to exchange knowledge and best practices.
  Highlighting best practices in Metaverse education: Identifying and promoting effective strategies to enhance Metaverse-based learning.
• Publishing case studies and white papers: Analyzing successful metaverse educational programs to provide insights and empirical evidence for future initiatives.

In addition, the Forum will also facilitate workshops, presentations, and events to promote Metaverse education, engage a broader audience, and encourage participation from various stakeholders.

Join us for our Upcoming Speaker Panel

On December 12, 2024 at 11 am Eastern US / 4 pm UTC we will host a virtual panel with experts in the field of education. This session will explore key topics around learning in virtual environments. Attendance is free. Register here.

To join the Metaverse Standards Forum and participate in the ongoing Educational Register discussions, please see the membership application form. Once you are a member you can join the Metaverse Educational Register working group. Learn more about our work.

Together, we can navigate the complexities of Metaverse education and advance the field towards greater effectiveness, interoperability and accessibility.

The post Announcing the Metaverse Educational Register for Education in Virtual Worlds appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

The paper defines technological interoperability and makes the case that an open and inclusive metaverse must prioritize interoperability in order to integrate with past, present, and future IT components. The paper advocates for collaboration within and across industries to create standards that enable innovation and integration at scale.

In the paper, Forum board member Christine Perey explores how the rapid evolution of metaverse technologies hinges on the ability to connect and integrate diverse systems at scale. Risks posed by siloed, proprietary platforms include fragmentation and barriers to innovation. Without interoperability, developers and customers will suffer from “lock in” and be unable to easily choose and personalize their user experiences. Perey outlines three zones where the Forum’s members are advancing the development of interoperability but stresses that there are many more requirements that will need similar investment for success. By identifying requirements in Forum working groups, members are helping Standards Development Organizations to prioritize their metaverse standardization efforts. These efforts are crucial in enabling the full potential of immersive experiences and digital interactions.

By bringing together over 2,600 members, including technology providers, developers, and standards organizations, the Metaverse Standards Forum acts as a hub for pre-standardization discussions, the development of interoperability frameworks, and the promotion of existing and emerging standards. Its working groups are tackling vital areas such as 3D asset interoperability, real/virtual world integration, and identity management, ensuring that the foundational building blocks of the Metaverse are open and interoperable across platforms. This work paves the way for a more inclusive, scalable, and innovative Metaverse.

The Metaverse Standards Forum is actively working on interoperability initiatives shaping the future of the Metaverse. Join us in this mission!

Please read the full paper here, this is also available in the IEEE Xplore library. Please also explore the slides from the ISEMV presentation.

The post IEEE Publishes New Paper Exploring Interoperability for an Open Metaverse appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.

To address the interoperability issues hindering the adoption of volumetric media services, Metaverse Standards Forum has established a dedicated Volumetric Media Interoperability (VMI) Domain Working Group. The recently established working group aims at creating a platform for facilitating the discussion between multiple SDOs and industry forums. It intends to work on identifying and solving concrete interoperability issues between different systems. Many puzzle pieces have to be in place for volumetric media to become mainstream, and the industry will win more from working together than from working on proprietary solutions.

The Volumetric Media Interoperability Working Group kicks off June 13, 2024 at 7AM PT to share further plans on how it intends to achieve its goals. All Forum members are warmly invited to join the call and play an active role contributing to the development of volumetric media ecosystem.

Join the Forum today to join this meeting and any other Domain Groups that you are interested in participating in! Join as a Principal Member to receive benefits such as voting rights in the Plenary meetings, participation in the Oversight Committee, Board eligibility, and priority marketing considerations. This exciting opportunity gives your organization a voice in guiding the work of the Metaverse Standards Forum.

The post Metaverse Standards Forum Launches Volumetric Media Interoperability Domain Working Group appeared first on Metaverse Standards Forum.