Re: Feature incubations discussion

Here is a current status of Spatial Favicons:

Immersive Web Proposal:

Where are we now ?
There is no concrete acceptable solution for LoD incorporation into
'sizes'. I have gone through gLTF2.0 spec and I believe there is not much
in the existing specification that could represent LoD without adding
extensions.  We can work with Option 1: "Static Bounding Box". There might
be room to improve on it later, including an option to add Immersive web
custom extension to glTF2.0. Introducing new "attribute" outside "size"
will need far more time to make it to spec, than re-using existing one.

What is happening with HTML Spec ?
We opened an issue to add 3rd dimension in HTML Spec:
Rik discussed the issue with Spec Authors (at TPAC 2019), based on the
feedback, authors felt there would be confusion if we went with Option 2
(LoD metric based). Because it wasn't *'sizes'* in real sense. Authors also
feel that even with Option 1, while 'sizes' have always been pixels, it
would create confusion with 'millimeters'. We have provided our explanation
in the above linked issue. We believe, we can pursue Option 1.

What is happening w/ WebApp manifest ?
The WebApp manifest suggested that we add this to Image Resource github
explaining the 3rd dimension for 3D Favicon. Which is essentially going to
feed into HTML Specification:

Next Steps:
  * Would like to discuss this (with more time allotted) in our next conf
  * If we come to some agreement, I will start working with Image Resource

Magic Leap Inc

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 8:58 AM Ravikiran Ramachandra <> wrote:

> Hello Trevor, All
> Regarding Spatial-favicon:
> There is not much update after this:
> There are broadly two available options now (Unless someone else has a
> better proposal):
> 1. Use 3 dimension bounding box for sizes.
> 2. Reuse two dimension size with 'vertex count' x 'primitives' as the
> values.
> Of course there are some with the opinion that texture sizes do matter in
> quality. But we are unsure how to fit it in.
> There is not much room to provide quality from gLTF2.0 spec too.
> Magic Leap is Ok with either, but lean towards Option 2.
> warm regards
> Ravi
> On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 12:48 PM Trevor Flowers <>
> wrote:
>> Hello, immersive web folks.
>> During the Tuesday morning Immersive Web session at TPAC we're going to
>> have a discussion about how to move forward with each feature incubation.
>> If you're currently the feature lead then please be ready to give a quick
>> (~10 minute) review of the current state and the remaining work of the
>> feature.
>> Here are the feature incubation repos:
>> navigation: Diego Marcos
>> dom-overlays: Klaus Weidner
>> computer-vision: Blair MacIntyre
>> geo-alignment: Blair MacIntyre
>> layers: Artem Bolger
>> lighting-estimation: Kip Gilbert
>> real-world-geometry: Piotr Bialecki
>> spatial-favicon: Rik Cabanier and Ravi Ramachandra
>> anchors: Nell Waliczek and Brandon Jones
>> hit-test: Nell Waliczek and Brandon Jones
>> If you're listed above but aren't going to be able to make it to the
>> session (in person or via remote connection) then please let me know in
>> advance.
>> - Trevor
>> --
>> *Trevor Flowers* 🌸🌸
>> Principal at Transmutable
>> <>
>> Friend of the Wider Web
>> <>

Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2019 11:05:55 UTC