[Public WebGL] WebGLContextAttributes

Kenneth Russell [email protected]
Tue Jan 5 14:51:09 PST 2010

On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenneth Russell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Chris Marrin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Dec 23, 2009, at 5:01 PM, Kenneth Russell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Chris Marrin <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> I believe we did say we would allow a JS object literal to be used.
>>>> That's why WebGLContextAttributes doesn't have a constructor.
>>> This is my recollection as well, and it's also the reason the
>>> NameGetter and NameSetter extended attributes were used. However we
>>> didn't realize that this would prevent object literals from being
>>> passed for this argument.
>> So is this just a matter of adding [callback] to the interface definition?
>> Of so then we should certainly do that. Otherwise there's nothing to prevent
>> us from allowing an Object literal from being passed and converting it to a
>> WebGLContextAttributes in the binding. If WebIDL can't describe that we can
>> add it explicitly to the spec.
> As Philip pointed out we also need to remove the NameSetter,
> NameGetter and NameDeleter extended attributes. In other words, rather
> than trying to specify it as a dictionary, we need to state which
> attributes the DOM code will look up via callbacks. This is the IDL
> which will give us the desired result:
>    [Callback] interface WebGLContextAttributes {
>        attribute boolean alpha;
>        attribute boolean depth;
>        attribute boolean stencil;
>        attribute boolean antialias;
>        attribute boolean premultipliedAlpha;
>    };

Are there any objections to my updating the specification for


>>>> Speaking of which, someone mentioned that we should be using the
>>>> "editor's draft" of the WebIDL spec. But I can't find such a thing. Seems
>>>> like WebIDL should be able to describe generic containers (Objects), since
>>>> it can (at last viewing) supports sequences (Arrays).
>>> It's what Philip pointed to above:
>>> http://dev.w3.org/2006/webapi/WebIDL/
>> Ah. That was confusing since the URL has 2006 in it. Also when you search
>> for "webidl spec" you get the one from 2008. We should add a link to the
>> proper webidl spec to ours.
> I've added a link in the Normative References section, but haven't
> referred to it from elsewhere in the text yet. We need to update the
> syntax of the extended attributes and perhaps other places in the
> WebGL IDL to make it compliant with the current WebIDL draft spec.
> -Ken

You are currently subscribe to [email protected]
To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with
the following command in the body of your email:

More information about the public_webgl mailing list