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

Re: [Public WebGL] WEBKIT_ extensions

For the other APIs the convention is to use EXT for multi-vendor but not Khronos ratified extensions. That would seem to be appropriate here too. It is nuts to have different names for the same extension in different browsers.

So the name of the extension would be EXT_lose_context. The name string for enabling it would be WEBGL_EXT_lose_context as extensions always start with the API name.



On 02/11/2011 02:51, Benoit Jacob wrote:

On 01/11/11 01:41 PM, Adrienne Walker wrote:
El día 31 de octubre de 2011 14:53, Benoit Jacob<bjacob@mozilla.com>  escribió:

In the case of WEBKIT_lose_context, since it is so simple and useful for all
browsers, I would really like it to become WEBGL_lose_context. Does anybody
object to that and what steps need to be taken to make that happen?

There was some previous discussion about this here:

At the time, there were reservations about adding the WEBGL tag
without more general approval or ratification from Khronos.

Thanks, I didn't remember this conversation. Since it seems to have been such a large debate, for now we will just rename it to MOZ_lose_context on our side until consensus for WEBGL_lose_context happens.

Can I go ahead and add MOZ_lose_context to the registry?

I disagree with the arguments that WEBGL_lose_context is not needed as it could be implemented in pure _javascript_. A big focus at the moment is to get Web developers to care about contextlost/contextrestored events. It would help if we could just point them to a WEBGL_lose_context extension to test their app's behavior in all supporting browsers, rather than having to use a shim for all WebGL entry points.



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