Re: Media queries for stereoscopic 3D displays?

On 09/05/2012 09:12 AM, David Singer wrote:
...
> I think the question of whether the output surface is a single view,
> stereo, or auto-stereo could be a CSS question, whereas the technology
> to achieve it (e.g. dual or multi view, or single-stream frame packing)
> should be out of scope.

An approach that can target many technologies would have advantages.

Note that image and video content could well be tagged with a declared
format and converted to the target technology by the web browser and
this matter seems outside the scope of the style forum.  However a
website may have optimised content to target specific formats and it may
still be handy to have media queries for these.  If such media queries
were used to select among un-tagged content then technologies not
handled by media queries would not be supported (unless the format could
be inferred from the CSS media query which would seem an abuse of CSS).

For the purpose of styling, a general target would mean supporting a
fluid range of perspectives from left to right.  This could be done
explicitly with a parameter ranging from -1.0 to 1.0 for left to right,
or implicitly by allowing the depth of styled surfaces to be defined.

A proposal to add depth to styling would be ambitions but would seem the
most general solution and perhaps the best investment, and it would also
lead to the most consistent presentation.  Even on single view surfaces
the depth could be used to support automatic perspective, highlights,
shadows, focus, panning, and wiggle, cues.

The question becomes how to allow the depth to be specified in CSS?

Some options:
* Just the corners.
* Plus bump maps.
* Bezier or NURBS surfaces.
* A calculation.

Some other issues to consider:
* Viewpoint
* Lighting
* Surface properties

> But we need to decide what the semantics of a media query are (maybe we
> already did, as there have been previous discussions).  When do they
> overlap, and so on?

It would be good to review any prior discussion and would you happen to
recall where the previous discussion occurred and know any keywords to
locate it?

Regards
Douglas

Received on Wednesday, 5 September 2012 02:31:48 UTC