[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Public WebGL] The state of MRTs
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Brandon Jones <email@example.com> wrote:
That said, I do think it's sensible to try and inform users as much as possible when their WebGL application is doing something that will not be mobile-friendly, since the last thing we want is for people to inadvertently exclude mobile and not understand why. I've seen several charts tossed around on the mailing list giving compatibility of feature X on chipset Y. If those are available in a sensible format somewhere publicly (or can be made so) I think it would be a great idea to put together some browser extensions that monitor the extensions that a WebGL app loads and provide the user with a "Mobile health report" for their app, detailing what features they're using that may affect mobile compatibility. Alternately the same extension could be used to "simulate" the feature set of a device class by restricting the extensions that can be used. I'd be happy to help with the development of such a tool if it gets us to stop bickering about what features we can and can't support due to mobile.
I'd like a "can I use this in WebGL" for extensions (and other things like texture units, VS texture lookup etc.). The data I thrawled which I provide for discussions about extensions comes from glbenchmark.com
, which does not reflect the WebGL ecosystem.
Browser vendors could provide statistics about device capabilities which would be much appreciated to pour into a "can I use this" site. Any volunteers for the data?