RE: [oglbase-discuss] GL_RENDERER strings

[Thomas Roell]

In your message of 14 February 2000 you write:

> Michael Gold rightly pointed out that, if any formal requirements
> would be imposed on strings retrieved from GL, an extension would
> have to be defined. We can't retrofit GL_RENDERER with additional
> requirements. No matter how we turn it, it has nothing to with 
> ABI specs. Thomas Roell was merely trying to humor my request for 
> a good list of tokens. 

Actually yes and no. GL_VENDER and GL_RENDERER should (IMHO) be used
to just identify a configuration within the vendors own universe.
However as a vendor myself, there is a lot missing. Besides having all
those HW related things, there really should be a way for an
application to figure out, what core-API functions and what extensions
are done in SW only, vs. which ones can use HW support. Maybe that is
something to think about.

- Thomas
-- 
             Thomas Roell   /\         An imperfect plan executed violently
             Xi Graphics   /  \/\ _     is far superior to a perfect plan. 
         [EMAIL PROTECTED]   /   /  \ \     
                         / Oelch! \ \             George Patton