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

Re: [Public WebGL] Propose moving EXT_color_buffer_float to community approved

Thanks for your feedback Florian.

The most significant gain will be to move the extension to community approved, so it can be enabled by default along with WebGL 2.0. Khronos has specific processes around ratification which shouldn't be bypassed, and that status impacts WebGL extensions very little.

Any other comments? Hoping for feedback from Mark Callow and Jeff Gilbert as well.


On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
I have no objection against moving this extension to community approved. In particular I think it is non controversial to move it to community approved because:
  • It mirrors the ES 3.0 extension of the same name, and exposes the functionality without WebGL specific modifications, so there is very little chance of the specification making trouble further down the road.
  • Since it would only activate on WebGL 2.0 contexts, and will not be known on WebGL 1.0 contexts, there is no danger of any implementation issue with this extension breaking existing content.
I believe it would be permitted to jump an extension from draft to khronos ratified if the khronos board would wish to do so?

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:48 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com> wrote:
WebGL community,

I'd like to propose moving the EXT_color_buffer_float extension to community approved:

While WebGL 2.0 implementations aren't on by default yet in browsers, there is already a conformance test for this extension; it is passing on multiple prototype implementations; and the extension will definitely be needed once the spec is finalized.

Having it as a draft extension is causing some developers confusion.

Any comments or objections?