[Public WebGL] proposal draft for EXT_texture_filter_anisotropic

Ben Vanik [email protected]
Fri Feb 24 10:45:28 PST 2012

Looks like depth_texture also defines its own versions of constants already
defined on the main GL context, and they seems redundant there, too.

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Patrick Baggett <[email protected]
> wrote:

>> Would that mean that the getExtension calls adds a new property to the
>> existing context object? That sounds a bit scary, and has corner cases that
>> I'm not sure how to specify. What happens if the user has already defined a
>> UNSIGNED_INT property on it? Should it then be replaced? I'd rather keep it
>> on the extension object.
> I was thinking that the context would already have the UNSIGNED_INT
> property, which would simply be rejected unless the extension was enabled.
> It doesn't seem like UNSIGNED_INT is really specific to that extension.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://khronos.org/pipermail/public_webgl_khronos.org/attachments/20120224/fbb7c57b/attachment.html>

More information about the public_webgl mailing list