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

Re: [Public WebGL] experimental and prefixes still prevalent



On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Brandon Jones <bajones@google.com> wrote:
If you don't mind clarifying: What do you mean by "shown with the experimental flag?" Does this mean:

 - The browser will accept "experimental-webgl" as a valid context type? (I think all WebGL enabled browser match this description)
 - The browser ONLY accepts "experimental-webgl"? (This sound like what you're talking about)
 - WebGL support in any form must be enabled with a flag on those browsers?
The context is first tried to be obtained via canvas.getContext('webgl'). If that returns no context, then canvas.getContext('experimental-webgl') is tried. If that does return a context, webgl is marked as supported, and the experimental name is noted, and that's what you see on webglstats.


In the case of prefixed extensions, Chrome's policy is to no longer launch extensions with prefixes, though we will keep the prefixed versions around for older extensions. That doesn't necessarily apply to other browsers, however. I think Firefox said they would do the same as Chrome, but in Apple's case if they don't want to introduce a flag mechanism into the browser (which I'm sure they don't on iOS) prefixed extensions may be the only way they can expose draft extensions. Not that either of the cases you mentioned are still in draft status, I'm just saying there's still valid reasons to launch with a prefix.

I think in the case of ATC textures we had implemented the extension back when prefixing was a thing, but there may have been some errors in the implementation that prevented it from showing up in the stats till more recently.
The extension name is surmised from gl.getSupportedExtensions() and it's only counted as prefixed, if only a prefixed name is present. If both prefixed and unprefixed names are present, the unprefixed name is counted.

Is an experimental WebGL extension flag a bad idea on iOS?