Re: [Public WebGL] WebGPU

["Joe D Williams" <joedwil@earthlink.net>]

> There is no reason why their existence should weaken the case for a 
> WebGL 2.1.

So true, since long-term the x3d needs a strong and complete webgl and 
dom (and css and svg and mathml, and ruby).
All Best,
Joe


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Callow" <khronos@callow.im>
To: "Florian Bösch" <pyalot@gmail.com>
Cc: "Joe D Williams" <joedwil@earthlink.net>; "Andrew" 
<grizzly33@gmail.com>; "public webgl" <public_webgl@khronos.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 5:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Public WebGL] WebGPU



> On Feb 8, 2017, at 21:13, Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm also wondering, does this mean there isn't going to be a WebGL 
> 2.1?

I don’t think there is any relationship. xml3d and x3dom use WebGL for 
their rendering but their selling point is being a scene description 
language integrated with the browser DOM. There is no reason why their 
existence should weaken the case for a WebGL 2.1.

Regards

   -Mark

> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Mark Callow <khronos@callow.im 
> <mailto:khronos@callow.im>> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 8, 2017, at 8:43, Joe D Williams <joedwil@earthlink.net 
> > <mailto:joedwil@earthlink.net>> wrote:
> >
> > also look at this called xml3d at xml3d.org <http://xml3d.org/>
> It’s orthogonal being, in essence, a scenegraph built on top of 
> WebGL. It seems similar to x3dom which is built on X3D.




-----------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------