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

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



</lurk>

My 2 cents:

A 3d scene graph layered on top of WebGL (and/or other rendering
backends) in the form of a library: sure, the more the merrier --
WebGL should try to be functional enough to make this work well.

A 3d scene graph standardized into HTML: premature.  Despite many
attempts over the decades, there does not exist a one-size-fits-all
scene graph that is small enough to be a good standard.  Maybe someday
there will be, but HTML standardization is not the venue to discover
it.

One thing I *would* like to see is a good way to reflect an HTML DOM
subtree into a WebGL texture.  I think this would enable practically
all of the worthwhile use cases of DOM in 3D.  If a dominant scene
graph library emerges out of that, then think about standardizing it.

-T

<lurk>

On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net> wrote:
> I didn't imply it was a simpler WebGL.  I said it is an alternative
> declarative format for WebGL which as I understand it is not a declarative
> model.  Else, why this discussion?  I look forward to reading the schema.
>
> Spinning boxes don't interest me.  People who say scene graphs are only good
> for spinning boxes never used one.   But scene graphs are just one model.
>
> Is WebGL a good thing?  It's another thing.  For many projects the current
> plug-ins are more than adequate.  Since there is X3D work in progress to
> work with WebGL, alternatives to that should be understood for their
> advantages.
>
> A declarative format does have the advantage of being easily manipulated by
> other standard toolkits.  That's good.  On the other hand, if as with HTML5,
> it is yet another parse model as well, that's bad.
>
> 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 8:11 PM
> To: public webgl
> Subject: Re: [Public WebGL] A Declarative node set for WebGL?
>
>
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 3:31 PM, Len Bullard wrote:
>
>> 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?
>
> I don't really see it as a "simplified WebGL". But it would perhaps be a bit
> simpler to get up a simple spinning box with the declarative form than with
> WebGL and JavaScript. The big advantage is that you tie into the DOM and all
> its features much more tightly. The browser knows when the DOM tree has been
> mutated, either structurally or by changing attributes or CSS properties.
> That information can be used to rerender the 3D scene, but you can't get at
> it from WebGL today. A declarative form would also compute transforms from
> the root to the leaf nodes natively and can do so efficiently by caching
> intermediate results and knowing where transforms are animating.
>
> I don't see this as "yet another 3D scene graph format" I see it as a
> declarative form of WebGL. If you accept the premise that WebGL is "a good
> thing" then I think its easier to see this as the logical companion.
>
>>
>> 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?
>
> Again, I don't think it's as much simplification as it is more tightly tying
> into the native DOM and rendering facilities of the browser.
>
> I see this node set as taking the "Make everything as simple as possible,
> but not simpler" approach to a 3D declarative form.
>
> -----
> ~Chris
> cmarrin@apple.com
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
>
>

-----------------------------------------------------------
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: