Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Review OffscreenCanvas, including ImageBitmapRenderingContext (#141)

In that case you shouldn't you get rid of `transferControlToOffscreen`  and `commit`? Why have 2 ways to render from a worker? One using `transferToBitmapImage` and another using `commit`?  I assume `commit` is there because `transferToBitmapImage` is not efficient. Which kind of seems like it points out the issue? Why are there 2 ways to do this?

Might I suggest there should be only one way or at least if there are 2 ways they should both work for both use cases?

For example if a WebGL context could be bound to an OffscreenCanvas then you could do

```
cconst offscreen1 = document.querySelector("#c1*).transforControllToOffscreen();
const offscreen2 = document.querySelector("#c1*).transforControllToOffscreen();
const gl = offscreen1.getContext("webgl");

gl.setTargetCanvas(offscreen1);
...draw scene 1...
gl.commit();
gl.setTargetCanvas(offscreen2);
...draw scene 2...
gl.commit();
```

This seems like it would have a bunch of beneifts

* It would pull the 2 ways of doing things into 1 or at least make doing this both ways possible instead of the inconsistent way it is now. 
* It would also mean no need to set the size when switching which canvas you're planning to target
* It would also mean drawing to multiple canvases doesn't require transferring to imagebitmaps and then transfering those imagebitmaps from a worker back to the main thread so it's much simpler to use.
* It seems like it doesn't require nearly as much smarts or special algorithms for the browser to guess/infer how to keep around old drawingbuffers as it becomes clear what's supposed to happen

Is there a reason why this is a bad idea?


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/141#issuecomment-386805956