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

Re: [Public WebGL] Proposal to move WEBGL_compressed_texture_es3 to Draft

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
> WEBGL_compressed_texture_es3 has moved to draft:
> https://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/extensions/WEBGL_compressed_texture_es3/
> Tickets have been created:
> Firefox: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1129803
> Chrome: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=455568
> Webkit: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=141285
> IE: https://connect.microsoft.com/IE/feedback/details/1116140
> ANGLE: https://code.google.com/p/angleproject/issues/detail?id=908
> Questions on missing error definitions and texturing functions have been
> attached to the extension text.
>> The ES 3.0.4 specification allows for compressedTexImage3D and
>> compressedTexSubImage3D which are missing from this specification, should it
>> be added?
> WebGL 1.0 of course doesn't have tex[sub]Image3D. But it's possible that at
> some point we'd introduce an extension for it (the extension hasn't been
> formally proposed, but previously discussed unfavorably). I would propose
> not to define the tex[Sub]Image3D functions in this extension (i.e. leave
> that as it is) and if we would define the 3D texture extension for WebGL
> 1.0, we'd note its interaction with this extension (i.e. we'd have to add
> WEBGL_texture_3D because that one would also contain the symbols
> compressedTexImage3D and compressedTexSubImage3D). That's a bit messy of
> course, but it's likey we won't introduce 3D textures for WebGL 1.0 anyway,
> so the risk is probably small.
>> The ES 3.0.4 specification defines the errors INVALID_OPERATION, should it
>> be added?
> Anybody know the answer to that one?

It looks like the other WebGL extensions defining compressed textures
use INVALID_VALUE for this size check. I assume the conformance tests
are already verifying this. I'm in favor of minimizing the churn of
both the specs and tests in this area, so would suggest it be left as

>> The ES 3.0.4 specification defines the errors INVALID_VALUE for other
>> cases than compressed size missmatch, should these be added?
> Anybody know the answer to that one?

I'm not sure what portion of the spec you're referring to. Please feel
free to submit pull requests containing any clarifications you suggest
and they can be discussed there. Thanks.


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