- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 16:52:37 +0000
- To: "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
The normative prose of section 38.2 'Recommended shading language' recommends GL SL ES [1]. Per RFC2119 this means implementers MUST support GL SL ES unless there exist 'valid reasons in particular circumstances' to ignore this recommendation. While Microsoft has no objection to defining how the feature works for UAs that choose GL SL ES as defined by Web GL 1.0, we object to its normative recommendation. This was the reason for the note in the same section, note which looks at best confusing if not contradictory given the normative recommendation that precedes it. We would prefer to follow a pattern similar to the informative section 6.1 in Media Source Extension[2]: "This section defines segment formats for implementations that choose to support WebM". We think the ability to specify multiple shading languages is important, as broadly suggested by the current note. This allows sites to work with different user agents supporting different shading languages. For example, a future version of GL SL ES with fallback to the current version for user agents that don't yet support the new version. [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/FXTF/raw-file/tip/filters/index.html#recommendation [2] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/html-media/raw-file/tip/media-source/media-source.html
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 16:53:35 UTC