- From: Rik Cabanier <rcabanier@magicleap.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2018 15:55:01 -0700
- To: stew@rtsmith.io
- Cc: Justin Rogers <j.rogers@oculus.com>, bmacintyre@mozilla.com, holykoolala@gmail.com, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>, nhw@amazon.com, Josh Carpenter <joshcarpenter@google.com>, public-immersive-web@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CADHwi=RvLPBgfrQtATpGX2pdkMf8MASN_V-2Ciqs_G7Pi5gbrw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 2:17 PM Stewart Smith <stew@rtsmith.io> wrote: > Hi Rik. It sounds like the answer is a negative for now, but I cannot > resist asking: Would you consider implementing the WebXR API in the near > future? Granted it’s not finalized yet, but it soon will be and wow would > that be fun to play with on Magic Leap! :) > WebXR is on our roadmap and we will support it in a future release. > Forgive me, I have a few questions that I didn’t see Helio docs for. > (Perhaps I was looking in the wrong place? What’s a more appropriate forum > for Helio questions?) > you can find more information on Helio here: https://creator.magicleap.com/learn/guides/helio We have a forum here: https://forum.magicleap.com/hc/en-us/community/topics but there's no specific one for Helio yet. "Lumin Runtime Development" is likely your best bet. > How might I get at the browser console when experimenting and debugging > something for Helio? > See https://creator.magicleap.com/learn/guides/helio-debugging-guide > You say you can grab 3D content out of the browser prism and place it in > world space; can you also then place the object back into the browser > frame? > No, once extracted, it can't be placed back in > If so, can that browser window instance read the object’s data—like > dropping an image into a regular desktop browser frame? Can 3D objects be > passed *between* browser frames? (Sort of like pulling an object off a > “browser shelf” to play with it and then later putting it away on a > different shelf.) > No. You could code it that way if you want, but prismatic does not expose that. > Do you allow popups (with permission)? > Yes > I’ve played with some of the demos; getting my hands on my own device > shortly. Cannot wait to dig into Helio! > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 4:42 PM, Justin Rogers <j.rogers@oculus.com> > wrote: > >> Technically it is almost spec’ed already. >> >> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/links.html#rel-icon >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__html.spec.whatwg.org_multipage_links.html-23rel-2Dicon&d=DwMFaQ&c=0ia8zh_eZtQM1JEjWgVLZg&r=jahSgznxrAL5kPgsRvs7bhKUEd9M5X0d-NE2WJg7VT0&m=gWZP1lTQJXaMPaOBIGGdgQn13QGFhoLCnb_VXacoDrY&s=RX_0r1KHTc-znQzZiwf3wRv7bcW1iohE70qjBSLK0Gs&e=> >> >> Only issue is that our type is model/gltf+... which is not an image type. >> The extension to the specification would be that: >> 1) The type can be other than an image type such as model. We could say >> image or model for now. Which formats of models is not important really >> since we probably want to be restrictive but until the mass web agrees it >> would be better to simply accept any supported popular 3d format. >> 2) We should consider if we want to amend the default lookup behavior >> when an icon is not present. I propose that we do not as that is legacy >> behavior and in our case we can do this more completely. That said it will >> be a pain to have every page on a site get updated and I’m betting a large >> majority of fav icons today are served from the legacy behavior path. It >> would be good to get Edge, Chrome and FireFox to supply Browser stats on >> how most favicons are served. >> >> On Aug 18, 2018, at 1:10 PM, Blair MacIntyre <bmacintyre@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >> >> Not really red flags for the 3D favicon; this seems like something that >> is pretty “small”, would be really useful, and could be worked out and >> implemented by a few browsers, especially since the bigger questions of >> “what to do with the favicon” is up to the UA. >> >> >> -- >> Blair MacIntyre >> Principal Research Scientist >> bmacintyre@mozilla.com >> https://pronoun.is/he/him >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__pronoun.is_he_him&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=aiUMbGW4WL3JSYxR2Qm1uYACjq-bqRegNtlyhvV4xew&m=3Z7xD8YCqOmOMRGC9Q3JHJS0fK-JkA0AaGLo79sZ5Ew&s=BCCL9IrpI1a5RX9-gcRnBnYN6JuAq5mbWANP_xlaFkI&e=> >> https://blairmacintyre.me >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__blairmacintyre.me&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=aiUMbGW4WL3JSYxR2Qm1uYACjq-bqRegNtlyhvV4xew&m=3Z7xD8YCqOmOMRGC9Q3JHJS0fK-JkA0AaGLo79sZ5Ew&s=SPZ2St3v6SaAsAFB6siCaEPk3xFtFJrZ7AhhVSV85qE&e=> >> >> >> On August 18, 2018 at 3:15:31 PM, holykoolala (holykoolala@gmail.com) >> wrote: >> >> Is this discussion setting off red flags for anyone else? Official >> standards seem premature for something so undeveloped and not well >> understood. >> >> -Brett >> >> On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 10:38 AM Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 8:31 PM Rik Cabanier <rcabanier@magicleap.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 4:46 PM Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Definite +1 to driving this in the IWCG. The focus on getting WebXR >>>>> Device API out of the door will move to the soon-to-be-open-for-business >>>>> Working Group, which should free up some time and focus in the CG. I'm >>>>> personally pretty interested in driving some discussion in the CG for how >>>>> we can get some model interop - i.e. rough standardization on asset type >>>>> support, >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, that is a good idea. We will likely have to talk to several group >>>> within W3C to get a standard model type for the web. >>>> >>> >>> Yup. And make no mistake, I don't expect we'll limit the web to one >>> model type, but it would be good to get a baseline. >>> >>> As for the AR content, we can present what we currently implemented if >>>> there's interest from the group. >>>> >>> >>> I think that would be useful. >>> >>> >>>> and I've poked in to what you've done in Helio and Prismatic. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'd love to hear what your thoughts are on our approach. Did you >>>> already find the web inspector? :-) >>>> >>> >>> I saw the support but haven't hooked it in yet. I did get a hub with >>> mine, though, so I'm preparing. :) The browser UX had some... interesting >>> choices. I think the ML-model design has some potential, though it seems >>> pretty specific to headset AR scenario at first glance, and I think >>> bridging across device scenarios will be one of the harder challenges here. >>> >>> >>> >
Received on Saturday, 18 August 2018 22:55:39 UTC