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

Re: [Public WebGL] WEBGL_multiview discussion

Correct me if I'm wrong, but extensions in most cases have no relationship to version of standard, but to the hardware support. Some of the extensions can be supported by WebGL 1.0 and WebGL 2.0 capable platforms, and it is up to a hardware and driver to support then, and up to WebGL (regardless of version) to expose access to them, so even after standard and WebGL core functionality of any version is released, improvements and enhancements to the platform can be implemented later by supporting extensions.

WebGL 2.0 does not mean WebGL 1.0 is going away. There will be hardware where WebGL 2.0 won't be available, and it is within interest of web community to have wide support for things, with choice driven by a developer of using less supported feature with potential fallback or not.

If WebGL 1.0 does not goes away, does not mean that there should be no extensions work for WebGL platform as a whole that will make WebGL 1.0 better too.
Looking at webglstats.com - is great example, where developers seeing how support for certain extensions allows them to decide to work on implementations relying on them with fallbacks if needed. And features made on extensions that are available for WebGL 2.0 and WebGL 1.0 - is good example. Developer want to drive his decision about feature based on extension availability, not based on WebGL version.

On 3 January 2017 at 01:48, Mark Callow <khronos@callow.im> wrote:

On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:14, Olli Etuaho <oetuaho@nvidia.com> wrote:

The biggest hurdle for this I see is that WEBGL_multiview requires layout qualifiers, which do not exist in core WebGL 1.0 shaders, so it would be a bad fit for WebGL 1.0.

Why does this extension need to be supported on WebGL 1.0? Browsers are on the verge of removing the flags that are currently hiding their WebGL 2 implementations.