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

Re: [Public WebGL] WebGL working group - leadership

Hi John 

Was just adding to the record of events for the last 3 years. So as not be misunderstood I will state my position:

Not being part of the  WebGL Working Group , I can't directly comment on Ken's chairmanship; however during it WebGL has risen to be the most ubiquitous graphics/GPU library, supported on every device that you can currently buy, every platform and every current browser; and you can even very simply return to the desktop with node-webkit if you wanted to do something like deploy via Steam. 

It also must be by now the most tested; have the most conformance tests and clear standards of any graphics library - so I think what the Working Group, and community has achieved is pretty amazing.

Community-wise in my experience Ken is very active and nurturing, generally being one of the first to reply to posters in this and other forums with advice, suggestions and encouragement as well as step in when debates get a little too heated. I have at times been the recipient of this and thank him for it.

On WebGL 2.1, I see WebGL more around ubiquity and productivity than bleeding edge.  If you want the absolute latest then you go raw native as you get it before the other tools that use it have been written; but also you need to write each platform differently, and have different sets of code for different feature levels, fall-backs etc.

Right now, I'm happy to wait a bit longer until ES3.1 is much more widespread before writing code for it. I felt differently prior to IE on Desktop/WinPhone and Safari on OSX/iOS joining the mix. I'm actually enjoying the interlude of unity of api.

At this juncture its probably wiser to wait to see what the effects will be of the Android Extension Pack, iOS's Metal, AMD's Mantle and DirectX 12 before rushing to implement or define a cross platform WebGL > 2.0

Sorry, turned out a bit long...

On 19 October 2014 22:17, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
Completely agree, we wouldn't be here if it weren't for Mozilla and Vlad.  I wish they were still leading the standard.

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Ben Adams <thundercat@illyriad.co.uk> wrote:
Also for the last 3 years, looking at adjunct WebGL progress bringing in more established areas: 

WebGL output from Unreal, Unity, Flash Professional (Adobe)

There's even a WebGL based humble bundle: https://www.humblebundle.com/

Hat's off to Mozilla for a lot of work in these areas

On 19 October 2014 20:03, Tony Parisi <tparisi@gmail.com> wrote:
In my opinion, Ken is doing a fantastic job.

One can measure the "progress" of a standard by its rate of adoption and its high degree of interoperability - both crucial for its success - just as much or more than the rate at which features are being introduced. WebGL is tops in both. This is in no small part because this group, led by Ken, has been stable and focused on conformance over adding features.

What progress has been made in the last three years? WebGL is ubiquitous. That's enough for me. I can live without multiple render targets for another year...


On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
On http://webglstats.com/ with about 7-8 million visits across its contributing sites, I measure 90% desktops and 10% mobiles. For much of 2012 and 2013 the trend for mobiles has been rising, but in 2014 it's flagging somewhat.

http://gs.statcounter.com/ has Desktops at 62% and mobiles at 30% (the rest being uncategorizable other things). The change from last year is desktops -12% and mobiles +14%. Even assuming the trend'd continue linearly, you'd look at years before you could "lay desktops to rest" as an audience.

However I'd also not be happy with a situation where a machine that I can stick in a GTX-980 that'll get about 1000x as much performance as any of the latest smarphones, is something that can't run WebGL well. I think that's counterproductive to WebGL.

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:49 PM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
I would suggest we weigh the number of smart phones and tablets on the planet against the number of PC's.  Think big picture, India, China, U.S., ...

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:33 PM, John Davis <jdavis@pcprogramming.com> wrote:
Beginning with a clean slate is always easier.  ES 3.1 is so different, it affords this opportunity.  There is no backwards compatibility chain for existing developers.  Everyone is starting again with a new API.
I'll prefer WebGL 2.0 because it's quite likely it'll arrive next year (around 8 months) and it'll support a lot of desktop and mobile hardware. WebGL 2.1 would probably not arrive next year and its support for desktop and mobile hardware would be substantially lower than WebGL 2.0.

MANGLE is the hell you're speaking of.
A Web technology that doesn't work for most people is not very attractive.

Tony Parisi                             tparisi@gmail.com
CTO at Large                         415.902.8002
Skype                                     auradeluxe
Follow me on Twitter!             http://twitter.com/auradeluxe
Read my blog at                     http://www.tonyparisi.com/
Learn WebGL                         http://learningwebgl.com/

Read my books!
Programming 3D Applications in HTML5 and WebGL
WebGL, Up and Running