That’s interesting. I don’t know much about OpenCOLLADA, but the original authors of COLLADA were still active there, even last year I think. OpenCOLLADA is not like COLLADA, which is something I find very counterintuitive myself, since COLLADA is a whole lot to learn/implement, so it seems odd to couch it differently then itself, especially since you have to learn more about OpenCOLLADA. I’m developing new COLLADA tools for C++ but only at a glacial pace (see my signature) but I don’t think my work on it is proceeding at a necessarily bad pace.
I’m overhauling the original DOM, so what it is really is an XML Schema based heterogeneous container system, so that you can work with COLLADA exactly like how it is in a document, with really good C++ compile-time features and type-safety. I feel like COLLADA is so complicated that I wouldn’t want to try to do anything with it otherwise. It’s like a giant labyrinth, that I can’t imagine approaching with existing XML software. Which is why, I think it didn’t fair well back in 2010. Compilers are only beginning to be half decent at compiling the schema implemented with C++ templates. If you know anything about C++. And the Visual Studio IDE is really bad at parsing C++ (IntelliSense) so that it doesn’t help a whole lot to take in the schema. It fails at auto-fill, documentation balloons, and so on. So I think 2025 might be the right time frame.