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

Re: [Public WebGL] Depth+stencil extension




On Apr 2, 2010, at 12:01 PM, Kenneth Russell wrote:

...

And I  think that's much too harsh. We should somehow fail gracefully when an attempt is made to create and unsupported combination of depth and stencil. If this is not OpenGL ES spec compliant then we should describe thoroughly how the behavior differs and make sure it returns enough information to the authors so they can understand how to proceed. I don't think the fact that it's not possible to create an FBO with both a depth and stencil buffer should prevent ANY WebGL from running.

I agree with you that it would be better to run at least some WebGL
content on such devices rather than none.

After rereading the section in the OpenGL ES 2.0 spec on framebuffer
objects and completeness, it sounds like from a strict standpoint, if
an OpenGL ES 2.0 implementation supports just a color renderbuffer or
texture FBO attachment (and no other attachments, for example depth or
stencil), then it is allowed to return FRAMEBUFFER_UNSUPPORTED from
CheckFramebufferStatus() for any other configurations.

Is that correct? Mark Callow or others from the ES working group, is
this legal (if poor) behavior?

Basically, the question is whether the majority of ES 2.0
implementations today support all of the FBO attachment combinations
color, color+depth, color+stencil, and color+depth+stencil. If they
don't, then there is basically no issue. If they do, then we should
specifically mention in the Differences section of the WebGL spec that
WebGL implementations may have less support of certain framebuffer
attachment combinations than is implied by the OpenGL ES 2.0
specification.

I think it's clear that the OpenGL ES 2.0 spec makes it legal to create and FBO with color+depth or color+stencil. The question is about color+depth+stencil. As you've stated before it's not reasonable to let an author attach both a stencil and depth buffer and then try to "figure out" intent in the implementation a do the right thing. But that's why you added DEPTH_STENCIL_ATTACHMENT right? Section 6.2 makes it pretty clear how to do depth+stencil.

So I think we're covered as far as how to do it. It should also be clear that attempting to do depth+stencil on a platform that can't do it in any way will fail.  It seems reasonable that this failure come either when attaching depth+stencil or in the CheckFramebufferStatus call. The only question is whether we fail at context creation time if the platform can't handle depth+stencil. I don't think it should, but I believe it is (at least in WebKit) today.

-----
~Chris