Hi JS, On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:19 AM, Jean-Sébastien Guay <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure, I should have said "is it ratified by the ISO or another international > standards body". Still, is OpenGL really a standard? A de-facto standard, > perhaps, as much as OSG is the de-facto standard for scene graphs. But it's > a spec, not a standard in the broader sense.
Ahh, I recognize the condition now, we have an open standards denier ;-) >From the Khronos website, it leads with: "The Khronos Group is an industry consortium creating open standards for the authoring and acceleration of parallel computing, graphics and dynamic media on a wide variety of platforms and devices." > Anyways, I want to be clear that I don't belittle OpenGL in the least. It's > a great tool that I use everyday (either through OSG or not). Calling OpenGL a de-facto standard rather than an open standard is belittling OpenGL, Khronous and the ARB. Open standards take courage and conviction to develop. Sure I wish Khronous/ARB would be more open to outside contributors, I wish the process of developing OpenGL was more open, but the final specs are are a royalty free open specs. This allows Mesa to exists without buying into any consortium, and allows it's license to be be open. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
