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

Re: [Public WebGL] Re: Webp



I don't believe that it is the job of the WebGL conformance test suite to test non-webgl features: namely what image formats are supported by a UA.  Otherwise why don't we (for example) test tiff, ico, jpeg2000, pdfs, SVG, the many and varied raw image types, etc.

The WebGL spec talks about <image> and <video> it is the browsers job to do the conversion from actual resource -> dom element type -> webgl texture, and that mechanism is independent of the webgl spec.  The conformance test for <image> is not about whether a given format is loaded, but whether a given <image> in whatever format[s] a UA supports is correctly converted to a webgl texture.

--Oliver

On Dec 3, 2010, at 8:10 AM, Mo, Zhenyao wrote:

> WebP is not supported by all browsers yet that are running WebGL.
> That's why we can't add an entry in conformance test.
> 
> Mo
> 
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 7:31 PM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
>> Isn't there already a unit test or something for this?  Why do I have to
>> write a test?
>> 
>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) <gman@google.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Gregg Tavares (wrk) <gman@google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I haven't tried it. If WebKit's image decoders support it then it
>>>>> should theoretically work. Try it and let us know.
>>>> 
>>>> The conformance tests use webp in the Chromium dev build and they pass so
>>>> I'm guessing it should work.
>>> 
>>> or am I getting confused. Sorry, I read that was webm, not webp. I don't
>>> know about webp. Tell us if it works.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Ken
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:27 AM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I see WebP is also supported in the Chrome 9 build, can it be used
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> WebGL for texturing?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:43 AM, John Davis
>>>>>>> <jdavis@pcprogramming.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> What started this whole thing is the claim that Webp is much better
>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>> jpeg.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Btw, is webgl on by default in chrome7 or do we have to wait for
>>>>>>>> chrome8?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Actually, WebGL will not be on by default yet even in Chrome 8. We
>>>>>>> expect it to be on by default in Chrome 9.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -Ken
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, October 20, 2010, Patrick Baggett
>>>>>>>> <baggett.patrick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 6:33 AM, John Davis
>>>>>>>>> <jdavis@pcprogramming.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I guess I'm asking the browser makers.  Anything that cuts down on
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> bandwidth bill for texture maps being downloaded to end users is
>>>>>>>>> going to be
>>>>>>>>> a welcome feature.  If people build MMOG's on this technology,
>>>>>>>>> compression
>>>>>>>>> of textures is going to be key.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hate to ask the obvious question, but is there something wrong
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> PNGs or JPEGs? They both perform compression, and in the case of
>>>>>>>>> JPEG,
>>>>>>>>> offer space/quality trade-offs. Since you've moved outside the
>>>>>>>>> realm of real
>>>>>>>>> time compression/uncompression, why not settle on those -- the
>>>>>>>>> browser
>>>>>>>>> support is great as is the tool support to create them. You can
>>>>>>>>> even use
>>>>>>>>> nifty utilities like pngcrush.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I guess what I am trying to say is, unless there is compelling
>>>>>>>>> reason
>>>>>>>>> and amazing algorithm that really puts PNG and JPEG to shame, I
>>>>>>>>> don't see
>>>>>>>>> any reason that yet another image format would be desirable, and
>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>> likely just make the artists' lives more difficult (i.e. texture
>>>>>>>>> mapping a
>>>>>>>>> model using KTX file? Not likely to be supported)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
>>>>>>>> the following command in the body of your email:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
>>>>> the following command in the body of your email:
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
> the following command in the body of your email:
> 


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