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

Re: [Public WebGL] Volume Textures

Wait how long?  Can't we at least start the Angle work?  I'm guessing the changes will take a few months, and then there will be testing.

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Mo, Zhenyao <zhenyao@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Benoit Jacob <bjacob@mozilla.com> wrote:
> ----- 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
>> (http://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/extensions/), 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.
> Benoit

Web is never universal.  For example, many Korean website build around
ActiveX, and it's only for Windows/IE users.  Also, we all know if a
web is built in Flash, certain devices won't display it.

Again, I think we should wait, but at certain point when webgl is well
known and well perceived, adding kicking ass but none-universal
extensions should be on the agenda.  Otherwise we are limiting
possibilities and holding back potential business/markets.

> -----------------------------------------------------------
> You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
> the following command in the body of your email:
> unsubscribe public_webgl
> -----------------------------------------------------------