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

RE: [Public WebGL] A Declarative node set for WebGL?



Don’t we already have multiple declarative formats that can be built over WebGL?   What is the advantage of baking yet another one into WebGL itself?  Because it maps more directly to the native WebGL data structures?  Or because it has the WebGL object model baked into the declarative nodes?

 

In VRML 2.0, the debate over object/markup impedance mismatching was long.  However, it made the point that interoperability via data transfer (bits on the wire, as Bray says) is very limited particularly where rendering and behavioral fidelity have to be very strong across platforms.

 

If I understand you, the main advantage of your proposal is the DOM scripting is simplified for those authors who want to instance and navigate directly in the WebGL objects.  Is that right?

 

len

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-public_webgl@khronos.org [mailto:owner-public_webgl@khronos.org] On Behalf Of Chris Marrin
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 2:49 PM
To: Gregg Tavares
Cc: public webgl
Subject: Re: [Public WebGL] A Declarative node set for WebGL?

 

Interstingly, the response to every one of your points below is the same. Why discuss this here? Why this scene graph rather than any other? How can you use this to produce other scene rendering techniques? I'm discussing a declarative form of WebGL. It has all the benefits and characteristics of WebGL with the additional benefits of native traversal, DOM and CSS integration and events.

~Chris