[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Public WebGL] WebGLContextAttributes



On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com> wrote:
>
> On Dec 23, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe we did say we would allow a JS object literal to be used.
>>> That's why WebGLContextAttributes doesn't have a constructor.
>>
>> This is my recollection as well, and it's also the reason the
>> NameGetter and NameSetter extended attributes were used. However we
>> didn't realize that this would prevent object literals from being
>> passed for this argument.
>
> So is this just a matter of adding [callback] to the interface definition?
> Of so then we should certainly do that. Otherwise there's nothing to prevent
> us from allowing an Object literal from being passed and converting it to a
> WebGLContextAttributes in the binding. If WebIDL can't describe that we can
> add it explicitly to the spec.

As Philip pointed out we also need to remove the NameSetter,
NameGetter and NameDeleter extended attributes. In other words, rather
than trying to specify it as a dictionary, we need to state which
attributes the DOM code will look up via callbacks. This is the IDL
which will give us the desired result:

    [Callback] interface WebGLContextAttributes {
        attribute boolean alpha;
        attribute boolean depth;
        attribute boolean stencil;
        attribute boolean antialias;
        attribute boolean premultipliedAlpha;
    };

>>
>>> Speaking of which, someone mentioned that we should be using the
>>> "editor's draft" of the WebIDL spec. But I can't find such a thing. Seems
>>> like WebIDL should be able to describe generic containers (Objects), since
>>> it can (at last viewing) supports sequences (Arrays).
>>
>> It's what Philip pointed to above:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/
>>
>
> Ah. That was confusing since the URL has 2006 in it. Also when you search
> for "webidl spec" you get the one from 2008. We should add a link to the
> proper webidl spec to ours.

I've added a link in the Normative References section, but haven't
referred to it from elsewhere in the text yet. We need to update the
syntax of the extended attributes and perhaps other places in the
WebGL IDL to make it compliant with the current WebIDL draft spec.

-Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------
You are currently subscribe to public_webgl@khronos.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
the following command in the body of your email: