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

Re: [Public WebGL] WebGL 0.92



As far as I know the "0.92" was semi-randomly chosen Microsoft's developers as a slightly tongue-in-cheek way of acknowledging that their WebGL implementation isn't complete. I do appreciate that they return a string that differentiates them from the fully compliant implementations in other browsers, and I don't think that attempting to limit that would be of much benefit.

As far as a published specification goes, I don't think that Khronos has any interest in defining a spec for WebGL <1.0. Microsoft has documented the APIs that they support (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/dn302469), which isn't a "spec" but does provide developers guidance. 


On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
These are the published WebGL versions:
These are the published ES versions:
  • ES 2.0 trough 2.0.25
  • ESSL 1.0 trough 1.0.17
This are the strings popularly reported by most WebGL capable browsers:
  • VERSION: WebGL 1.0
  • SHADING_LANGUAGE_VERSION: WebGL GLSL ES 1.0
These are the strings reported by IE11:
  • VERSION: WebGL 0.92
  • SHADING_LANGUAGE_VERSION: WebGL GLSL ES 0.92
  • Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko

As far as I know the strings returned by these queries isn't defined in the specification. I have a couple questions about that:
  • Should it be defined?
  • If defined, should the version refer to a published webgl/shading language version?
  • If a version is referenced for which there's no published specification, should a specification be published?