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

Re: [Public WebGL] Volume Textures



Years have gone by, and look were we're at!?  For heaven sake, let's just add it.

https://www.khronos.org/registry/gles/extensions/OES/OES_texture_3D.txt


On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 11:35 PM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
I'll be anxiously waiting :)


On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:23 AM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
> Ken,
> Vlad mentioned he would like to see the same thing.  My perception is that
> he was summarily ignored.  Didn't he get this whole thing started?  Dan
> Ginsburg, OES 2.0 Bible, also ignored.
> Forgive me for singling out Chris, but he seems to have final say on just
> about everything, which seems to fly in the face of an "open standard".
>  Perhaps I should start addressing all members of the working group.  Who
> all is on the working group?  Are they even seeing this dialogue?

I'm pretty sure that most of the people on the WebGL working group are
on this list. I am the chair of the working group (as of last
Thursday, taking over from Vlad). Chris, Mark Callow, Benoit Jacob and
Zhenyao Mo are all on the WG, and Vlad will likely be re-invited as an
outside expert.

All open standards have (or should have) leaders and decision makers.
Chris's opinion is just that, one opinion. We aim to get consensus in
the WG. There are Khronos practices for voting on contentious topics.
In this case, where the WG seems divided, the path of least resistance
forward would be to propose a browser vendor-specific extension rather
than incorporating the OES version of the extension. The latter is
considered "more official" but any browser vendor can put forth the
former.

> I truly believe this spec is going to change everything.  It's special.  But
> the handling of it's evolution seems to have some conflicts of interest.
>  Earlier Chris sited support of IOS devices, which I found frightening.
>  WebGL should not be limited/dictated by caps in IOS devices.

It isn't. However iOS is a major force in the mobile market and we do
not want to cause fragmentation of WebGL content early in its
lifetime. So far the extensions we have specified and plan to specify
work on desktop, iOS and Android. For the moment we would like to try
to keep it that way.

Also please keep in mind that the spec will continue to evolve. If you
can work around the limitations of the current spec for a few more
months I think you will be pleased with forthcoming revisions.

-Ken

> JD
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> (off-list)
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:18 PM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com>
>> wrote:
>> > My bad, you're right.  Again I site the stats from multiple sources at
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
>> > Doesn't matter though, I guess we won't see volume textures until Chris
>> > says
>> > we can have them.  Unless of course Gregg would be willing to have
>> > Transgaming add it to Angle w/o it being in the official extension
>> > registry.
>>
>> John,
>>
>> Please be polite. Singling out Chris and blaming him on the public
>> mailing list is inappropriate behavior. Additionally, I believe
>> Chris's opinion is the majority opinion in the WebGL working group at
>> this time.
>>
>> If you could convince a browser vendor to add the extension in their
>> namespace (MOZ_texture_3D?) -- or perhaps even implement it in one of
>> the browsers and submit patches -- then perhaps others would add
>> support for the same extension.
>>
>> -Ken
>>
>> P.S. The WebGL spec will continue to evolve. The current set of
>> functionality is not all that will ever be supported.
>>
>> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Mark Callow <callow_mark@hicorp.co.jp>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I think you have that backwards. It's a 4:1 ratio mobile to desktop.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> -Mark
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 06/04/2011 20:05, John Davis wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That's still a 1:4 ratio, the tail is wagging the dog.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Mark Callow <callow_mark@hicorp.co.jp>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Those stat's are deeply suspicious.
>> >>>
>> >>> It is widely reported that in Japan the majority of people access the
>> >>> internet from their mobile devices. A large number of these devices do
>> >>> not
>> >>> have identifiable operation systems.
>> >>>
>> >>> Another pointer is that when I visited http://whatsmyuseragent.com,
>> >>> only
>> >>> 4 of the most recent 15 visitors came from desktop devices.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards
>> >>>
>> >>> -Mark
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 06/04/2011 11:56, John Davis wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm frustrated we are hamstringing the spec due to limitations on the
>> >>> mobile side.  The majority of web browsers out there are not being
>> >>> used on
>> >>> mobile devices.  Call me nuts, but this just doesn't make sense.
>> >>> Look at the Web clients table.
>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
>> >>> Percentage-wise mobile web clients don't amount to squat.
>> >>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Apr 2, 2011, at 5:46 AM, John Davis wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > >all of the extensions there are available on at least one OpenGL
>> >>>> > > ES
>> >>>> > > implementation on mobile devices (iPhone).
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Chris,
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Why does the above matter if WebGL is never going to be available
>> >>>> > on
>> >>>> > iPhone/iPad/AppleTV?  Why don't we focus on what IS available?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Are you just making a fatalistic complaint that you're unhappy with
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> fact that iOS devices don't publicly support WebGL today? Or did you
>> >>>> get the
>> >>>> impression from me or someone else that iOS will never support WebGL?
>> >>>> If you
>> >>>> interpreted something I said in that way, then I apologize. No one at
>> >>>> Apple
>> >>>> can comment on if or when WebGL will be available on iOS. If you've
>> >>>> gotten
>> >>>> that information from a blog somewhere then you should ignore it (as
>> >>>> is a
>> >>>> general rule about bloggers and Apple rumors).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -----
>> >>>> ~Chris
>> >>>> cmarrin@apple.com
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>