[Public WebGL] EXT_shader_texture_lod in WebGL2?

Florian Bösch [email protected]
Sat Jan 21 14:03:13 PST 2017


I'll add a disclaimer to the ETC and ETC1 extension that empathically
discourages people from using these extensions. Are there any other
extensions I should warn people not to use?

On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Florian Bösch <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well we had the lengthy debate with a clear outcome, do not expose
> capabilities that the hardware doesn't support, especially not when the
> emulation has drastically different characteristics and leads to worse
> outcomes than when it wasn't pretend supported. I'm guessing this then
> falls under "WebGL1 is in maintenance mode and we won't fix it."?
>
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Maksims Mihejevs <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> This suggests they haven't done it:
>> https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=658763&desc=2
>>
>> We wanted to add ETC2 support, but currently blocked by this, as it is
>> totally unacceptable path: more VRAM (comparing to alternatives) and more
>> Download size.
>>
>> On 21 January 2017 at 21:46, Maksims Mihejevs <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Correct me if I'm wrong.
>>> But ETC2 and EAC is mandatory on OpenGL ES 3.0+ and OpenGL 4.3+ right?
>>> I could not find any information that Nvidia GPU actually supports ETC2
>>> and EAC.
>>>
>>> On Windows, using ANGLE, there is no OpenGL involved.
>>>
>>> So why then we seeing 71% support of WEBGL_compressed_texture_etc on
>>> Desktop Windows? And where there is OpenGL, such as Linux and OSX, we see
>>> only 5% on Linux, and 0% on OSX? :)
>>>
>>> I believe, they haven't actually decided anything, and wen't their way
>>> regarding CPU path, unless there is somebody here to prove that I'm wrong.
>>>
>>> On 21 January 2017 at 15:55, Florian Bösch <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Maksims Mihejevs <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We've seeing already many enormous issues. For example MSAA with ANGLE
>>>>> has CPU path, and is unusable at all, as performance drops insanely. ETC2
>>>>> was another case where CPU path was pushed a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you sure ETC2 is software decoded and put on the GPU plain? Because
>>>> if so, we've had a lengthy debate in 2016 about ETC1 that ended with Jeff
>>>> Gilbert stating:
>>>>
>>>> Update: The WG is planning on only exposing the extension where there
>>>>> is 'native' support. (Not D3D, maybe not Desktop NV?) We feel this
>>>>> best matches what devs expect when they see support for a compressed
>>>>> texture extension. Compressed image formats are a better delivery
>>>>> mechanism than compressed texture formats, if they're going to be
>>>>> decompressed anyway.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.khronos.org/webgl/public-mailing-list/archives/1
>>>> 609/msg00074.php
>>>>
>>>> I don't believe we'll need to have this debate all over again... do we?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://khronos.org/pipermail/public_webgl_khronos.org/attachments/20170121/549b61ee/attachment.html>


More information about the public_webgl mailing list