> ----- Original Message -----
>> On Mar 24, 2011, at 4:18 AM, John Davis wrote:
>> > In the meantime, is there any chance we could add an extension to
>> > WebGL and Angle to support volume textures for the rather large use
>> > case of Chrome and FireFox? This is very low hanging fruit that will
>> > add considerable bang on the fragment shader side.
>> Let's be careful about what we call "low hanging fruit". WebGL
>> attempts to allow content to be written across a wide range of
>> hardware. That's why we based the spec on OpenGL ES 2.0 rather than
>> desktop OpenGL. If you look at the WebGL extension registry
), all of the
>> extensions there are available on at least one OpenGL ES
>> implementation on mobile devices (iPhone).
>> That doesn't mean we can't discuss other extensions (like this one).
>> But I would be very against adding any and all extensions just because
>> they exist on some driver in some version of OpenGL on some platform.
>> I even agree that 3D textures are available in a majority of desktop
>> OpenGL implementations. And GL_OES_texture_3D is defined for OpenGL
>> ES. But I don't know of any current implementations of OpenGL ES that
>> support it.
>> My concern is that WebGL will get fragmented and that authors will
>> start using extensions that are available on a small number of
>> implementations degrading the WebGL experience for everyone else. I
>> don't think we want to go there at this early stage of development.
> For what it's worth, I am agreeing with Chris on this matter.
> To put it in more abstract terms: being a web specification, WebGL should (try hard to) be universally implementable.