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

Re: [Public WebGL] WebGPU




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