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

Re: [Public WebGL] GL_RENDERER string needed for performant apps

To the point about the whitelist vs blacklist, I think there are a couple of things that will lead this to be used as a blacklist.  First, the conformance tests drive standardization of whether things work or not, and specific extensions point to functionality availability.  This means that in general this should not need to be used for whether something works.  Secondly, the sheer number of GPUs and the rate at which new ones are added also lead towards a blacklist approach - as an app, we want to make sure people get the best experience possible, which means features and performance.  Using a whitelist would mean excluding a large number of potential users as new GPUs come online that don't need to be excluded, which directly goes against our goals.


On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

On 1/14/14 4:30 PM, Florian Bösch wrote:
GPU vendor and model will allow you to correlate bad performance
behavior to a particular GPU segment, make tweaks to improve things for
that segment.

Sure.  I understand the use cases for this.

I'm just saying concerns about a workflow like above but that makes tweaks that totally break things for that segment, and then the page author never notices are real concerns.  It happens all the time with the UA string.  The problem is less severe if this is basically used as a blacklist; if we have indications that this is more likely than it is with the UA string (which is often treated as a whitelist) I'd love to know what those are.


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