[x3d-public] QA/Validation on uniform/attribute shader variables. [ was: Re: Non-portability of X3D Shaders]

[John Carlson]

I propose we use the gl_ names for matrices from other versions of GLSL.
how do we vote?  Do we need other variables?
On Mar 28, 2016 3:48 PM, "John Carlson" <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:

> It would be fine for me to convert a standard to a particular vendor's
> shader variables.  What's the standard?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
> On Mar 28, 2016 1:08 PM, "Don Brutzman" <brutzman at nps.edu> wrote:
>
>> If you and others want to keep track of status, the working group could
>> create a web page to publish & maintain that information.
>>
>> Wondering if there is an API call that lists the names you are concerned
>> with.  That might help with run-time discovery.
>>
>> Sometimes people write javascript libraries to wrap/normalize different
>> browser idiosyncrasies.  Perhaps a similar approach is appropriate here?
>>
>> The great majority of X3D content does not depend on shaders, relying on
>> baseline X3D interoperability instead.  So hopefully this specialization
>> challenge can be decoupled and not become a blocker for most uses of your
>> X3D JSON Loader.
>>
>>
>> On 3/27/2016 7:11 PM, John Carlson wrote:
>>
>>> This is a problem with X3D vendors use of at least uniform matrix names
>>> in GLSL shaders.
>>>
>>> My use of the X3D JSON Loader (most of the bugs introduced, and crashes
>>> in the browser) and X3D in general is held up by differences in the X3D
>>> Shader variable names (not what they represent) from different vendors. Can
>>> we get some support from the Web3D (and/or possibly Khronos) consortium on
>>> standardizing uniform names (some non-portable matrices commonly supported
>>> by vendors, not authors) in (at least) GLSL shaders?   Validation of
>>> Shaders (warning for non-portable variables) would be useful. Thanks!
>>>
>>> Do most people do preprocessing, or stick with one vendor?  Not use
>>> GLSL?  I think my other alternative on Mac is Metal, which is way too
>>> platform specific.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>> On Mar 26, 2016, at 10:24 PM, John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I reported earlier on the non-portability of X3D shaders.  How does one
>>>> address the right working group to get this fixed?  Or am I taking the
>>>> wrong approach? I really would like to get some good content online and
>>>> this is hampering me.  Should I generate a script for each X3D player? Is
>>>> the player User Agent information sent to the server?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>
>> all the best, Don
>> --
>> Don Brutzman  Naval Postgraduate School, Code USW/Br
>> brutzman at nps.edu
>> Watkins 270,  MOVES Institute, Monterey CA 93943-5000 USA
>> +1.831.656.2149
>> X3D graphics, virtual worlds, navy robotics
>> http://faculty.nps.edu/brutzman
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20160328/07787e72/attachment-0001.html>