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

Re: [Public WebGL] Universal Shading Language Governance



I agree that adding MRTs to the current WebGL spec is the single
biggest "bang for the buck" feature that could be added. Let's
resurrect the old email thread on this topic. I will take the action
item to create the desired ANGLE extension based on the wording in the
ES 3.0 spec.

-Ken


On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 10:10 AM, Gregg Tavares (社用) <gman@google.com> wrote:
> There's a lot of work involved in designing WebGL2.0 based off ES 3.0. On
> top of that, many of the features of ES 3.0 are not available on mobile at
> this point in time.
>
> On the other hand, MRT is available in most places and it's a much smaller
> issue to tackle and seems more likely to get done. Of all the ES 3.0
> features, I feel like it would be best to add MRT as an extension asap
> rather than wait for us to figure out all of ES 3.0 before we can get any of
> its functionality exposed.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 12:58 AM, Marco Di Benedetto
>> > <spattija@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Above all, on my mind it is the long requests for multiple render
>> >> targets: ignoring all the complains was not a great move.
>> >
>> > I think we have a proposal for this on which Gregg did a bang up job to
>> > iron
>> > it out the issues between desktop and ES.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/KhronosGroup/WebGL/blob/master/extensions/proposals/WEBGL_fbo_color_attachments/extension.xml
>> >
>> > It's a topic for another thread what happens to this.
>>
>> Now that OpenGL ES 3.0 is out, it can be said publicly that the reason
>> for deferring work on this WebGL extension was to avoid introducing
>> behavior that would be incompatible with OpenGL ES 3.0.
>>
>> If someone would like to revise that extension to pull its language
>> *and semantics* from the OpenGL ES 3.0 specification, that would be
>> great.
>>
>> However, I am personally in favor of moving in the direction of
>> upgrading the WebGL specification to incorporate all of the OpenGL ES
>> 3.0 functionality, not just this part. There are a lot of new
>> capabilities in ES 3.0 and I imagine that they all have subtle
>> interactions, so adding them as individual extensions to WebGL would
>> be more work than it's worth.
>>
>> I've personally been too swamped recently to initiate email threads on
>> public_webgl regarding the status of the WebGL 1.0.1 spec snapshot and
>> passing of the 1.0.1 conformance suite, but any of the other WG
>> members (Benoit, for example) should feel free to discuss the current
>> state of things.
>>
>> -Ken
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>

-----------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------