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

Re: [Public WebGL] Depth Texture Extension

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Marco Di Benedetto <marco.dibenedetto@isti.cnr.it> wrote:

On 25/01/2012 22:58, Daniel Koch wrote:
Would you still be happy if the OES extension was present but not widely supported?
personally, yes. that's how extensions work.
but given that there was an intense discussion and decision about the strategy to follow to ratify extensions (that I personally don't like, but that I fully respect as I am happy a good discussion led to it), I am ok with it.

but again, as Florian reported, 326 devices support it. to me, it seems a respectable part of the market (well.... excluding intel boards that mostly motivated the birth of ANGLE).
however, if we follow the extension guidelines, it seems to me that 326 devices + the ones on which ANGLE will run are strictly less than the 100% of the devices supporting core ES 2.0. if I am right, doesn't the registration of the WEBGL depth tex extension violate the overall extension strategy, as there exists something that does not support it? If this is the case, so why to publish the WEBGL ext before the OES one? why do not give precedence to khronos extensions? again, please correct me if I misunderstood/lost something, but following the discussion I understood that the WEBGL stripped extension would at the moment be put on the registry, and I read no words about when the OES one would go in.

326 devices okay but I think the point is, at least today, less than 0.1% of devices running WebGL support it. WebGL only really runs on desktops today and few of them support OES_depth_texture. Sure WebGL runs very slowly on FF Android where OES_depth_texture supposedly exists (cubemap depth texture are NOT tested by the OpenGL ES 2.0 conformance tests)

So, you can have WEGL_depth_texture and support nearly 100% of current WebGL devices or you can have OES_depth_texture and support 0.1% of current WebGL devices.


ISTM that making 2 extensions with explicitly identified functionality is better than having one which is unclear.

sure it is better. I hope the above comments clarify my position.

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