W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: request for guidance: centralized extensibility for HTML5 using X3D graphics

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:09:09 -0800
Cc: Chris Marrin <cmarrin@apple.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <1D3E7EAE-6B18-4182-885C-644B1CBA7526@apple.com>
To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>

On Feb 23, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Leonard Rosenthol wrote:

> So you are requesting the HTML5 mandate (or at least recommend)  
> WebGL as a standard technology?  Or that the X3DDOM be a standard  
> part of the HTML5 DOM?
> I guess I don't understand exactly what you are asking of this  
> working group.

I think Chris is not requesting any change to HTML5's current  
requirements. WebGL already has an independent specification. It will  
have exactly the same standing as the canvas 2D graphics context,  
which will also soon be found in an independent draft (except that it  
happens to be maintained by a different standards organization).

If I understand Chris correctly (and please correct me if I'm wrong),  
his position is that WebGL is the right piece of 3D technology to add  
to the Web platform at this time, and once it has seen some  
deployment, we should consider whether we can also define a simple  
declarative 3D format that integrates with Web technology. None of  
this requires any immediate changes to HTML5.


> Leonard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-html-request@w3.org [mailto:public-html-request@w3.org]  
> On Behalf Of Chris Marrin
> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 5:04 PM
> To: public-html@w3.org
> Subject: Re: request for guidance: centralized extensibility for  
> HTML5 using X3D graphics
> On Feb 23, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Krzysztof MaczyƄski wrote:
>> Chris,
>>> GeoNodes, metadata, and even all the primitives (Box, Sphere,  
>>> etc.) could be easily done in a JavaScript library and kept out of  
>>> the core node set. There would also be no need for TimeSensors or  
>>> other timing or animation related nodes. You could also eliminate  
>>> the complexity of Prototypes, which can be done in a JavaScript  
>>> library.
>> Your point of view doesn't generalize beyond scripting-centricity.  
>> Standard arguments about declarative approaches being superior  
>> under many circumstances, especially in markup, apply here.
> I'm not sure what you mean by that statement. Advocating the use of  
> scripts to extend a given set of functionality (like 3D) is not at  
> odds with a declarative approach. X3DOM is proof of that. The  
> question is what needs to be hardcoded into the browser. I think  
> WebGL is a great first pass at what is needed. Any further steps  
> have to be done with a minimalist approach or they will never gain  
> any traction. The main point of my statements was that you don't  
> need to give up functionality because of that minimalist approach.
> -----
> ~Chris
> cmarrin@apple.com
Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2010 00:09:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:58 UTC