Re: WebView and WebGL

It would be a lot of work, and not something we are likely to do any time soon. -- Kevin On 8/26/2021 10:46 AM, Phil Freihofner wrote: All this recent, great activity on WebView makes me wonder: are there plans in place, or any teams actively working on enabling WebGL? I was recently shown,

WebView and WebGL

All this recent, great activity on WebView makes me wonder: are there plans in place, or any teams actively working on enabling WebGL? I was recently shown, and tried myself to display|a site at webglsamples ||with no success. What are the hurdles? Are they mostly technical, or is it mostly a

RE: WebView and WebGL

r 12, 2017 9:52 PM > To: Jan Tosovsky > Cc: openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: WebView and WebGL > > Hi Jan, > > I have to say that I find your question rather "curious"! > > Imagine asking a Qt developer "Why do you need 3D in Qt?&qu

Re: WebView and WebGL

ing a bug-infested shiny new toy that does little or nothing more than what they started with. And they don't want to buy into the "HTML5 hype" either. They're going to face a complete brick wall trying to do what I just described by shifting to browser-based technologies. My sugges

RE: WebView and WebGL

On 2017-09-10 Nir Lisker wrote: > > 3D enhancement are indeed not planned for Java10 (at the minimum) ... > but I agree with Mike - you can, maybe somewhat surprisingly, do quite > a lot with what there is. > > ... > > We've employed some clever tricks to get adequate "advanced features" >

Re: WebView and WebGL

Yes, and this is primary reason that ANGLE exists, and is used to implement WebGL on Windows by translating GL calls to Direct3D. -- Kevin Philip Race wrote: FWIW Java 2D ships OGL support on Windows (turned on by a flag) and our SQE have occasionally dutifully run tests in that mode and

Re: Innovation (Was: WebView and WebGL)

Well, you would certainly know - thanks. That's very encouraging :-) > On 11 Sep 2017, at 20:02, Johan Vos wrote: > > From experience, I can tell you that if you do the work and write > high-quality code that makes OpenJFX better, I'm sure it will be possible to >

Re: Innovation (Was: WebView and WebGL)

>From experience, I can tell you that if you do the work and write high-quality code that makes OpenJFX better, I'm sure it will be possible to integrate it. - Johan On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 3:00 AM John-Val Rose wrote: > Thanks Nir. > > I am very aware of the formal

Re: Innovation (Was: WebView and WebGL)

Thanks Nir. I am very aware of the formal processes involved but also cognisant of the considerable time/delays and "red tape" that can be an undesirable consequence of such formality. I'm also not a "hope for the best" kinda guy. I think first we really need (and really hope) someone from

Re: Innovation (Was: WebView and WebGL)

I don't mind giving it a go but I wouldn't like doing the work and then it not getting implemented (if the result is a success). Personally, I think that the first thing we should do is make a list of what exactly it is we are trying to do if only to get a sense of the magnitude and be sure we

Innovation (Was: WebView and WebGL)

Nir, You're not "hijacking" anything - I think it's been established that this a broader "3D API support" issue. In fact, even broader than that. I'm only new on the JavaFX "scene" but I've looked through the history and tried to analyse the present and anticipate the future. It seems that

Re: WebView and WebGL

I don't want to hijack the WebGL discussion but since it rolled into the 3D library territory anyway I'll give my 2 cents. 3D enhancement are indeed not planned for Java10 (at the minimum) and indeed you can't bring your own shader (asked already at

Re: WebView and WebGL

...if only you could "bring your own" shader :-; On 10 Sep 2017, at 21:04, Mike Hearn wrote: >> >> (And yes, the current JavaFX 3D features are extremely rudimentary and not >> particularly useful. I don't expect them to be ever enhanced. They're >> effectively "frozen". It's

Re: WebView and WebGL

> > (And yes, the current JavaFX 3D features are extremely rudimentary and not > particularly useful. I don't expect them to be ever enhanced. They're > effectively "frozen". It's a harsh call but I think they were a mistake > from day one. We need a completely different alternative). > I

Re: WebView and WebGL

Yes Scott, the rendering in WebView is done with the JavaFX API which has pros and cons. The major "pro" is that it is a lightweight control that plays nicely with all other controls (and the performance is surprisingly good). The "con" is that implementing WebGL was thus very complicated

Re: WebView and WebGL

If I’m remembering correctly, I think the another factor for why WebGL wasn’t included is that the rendering layer of WebKit was done on top of JavaFX. That allows it to integrate nicely with the all the other JavaFX rendering. Personally I wish that time wasn’t wasted (IMO) on the existing 3D

Re: WebView and WebGL

FWIW Java 2D ships OGL support on Windows (turned on by a flag) and our SQE have occasionally dutifully run tests in that mode and regularly turn up bugs that look like driver bugs. As a consequence FX decided to not ship it. So although FX builds OGL support on all platforms it is excluded from

Re: WebView and WebGL

there some significant technical issue that makes WebGL >> implementation particularly difficult? >> > > Yes. See above. > > >> 3. What is a brief overview of the work that needs to be done? >> > > To expose WebGL, you have to do what Chrome does and map GL to

Re: WebView and WebGL

Having done some GL work on windows I've to agree with Mike. Windows GL drivers can be a disaster. If you are able to specify hardware for your users it's fine but if you take a random win-machine you are most likely in trouble. So something like angle would probably be the safest way to get EGL

Re: WebView and WebGL

and performance as they basically had a 20 year head start! But they do have a WebView with WebGL support and very advanced 3D features in general (like a 3D Canvas). For JavaFX, it looks as though the 3D features have been "unofficially deprecated" as no enhancements are planned

Re: WebView and WebGL

+1 ... to Any high performance way to get images from native code to the screen in a JavaFX app. I filed an enhancement request many years ago for a method to supply portions of the media pipeline for the media player APIs. I've also been asking for some way to get at a native surface

Re: WebView and WebGL

Hi Jonathan, hi all, I would like to bring up the "WritableImage backed by DirectBuffer" discussion again: I did my own experiments with WebGL and native rendering. I posted them a while ago here on the mailing list (https://github.com/miho/VFXWebKit & https://youtu.be/FlIrY1SlNM4). I came to

Re: WebView and WebGL

All, WebGL is something that is currently in the planning pipeline with a relatively high priority. This means it is not under active development yet, but we already have engineers working on the research towards this feature. Once this is concluded and the scope of the work better

Re: WebView and WebGL

This *is* the problem: 7 years since a formal issue is raised and still we have nothing. As I said, WebGL support won't happen unless *we* make it happen and I'm in a position where I have both a need and time to work on it. I'm sure others would help too. Once someone from Oracle responds to

Re: WebView and WebGL

Am 25.08.17 um 18:22 schrieb Nir Lisker: It has been suggested already in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8091035. I am well aware of these suggestions but did you look at the creation date?

Re: WebView and WebGL

It has been suggested already in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8091035.

Re: WebView and WebGL

I agree with you Michael. So let's open a discussion as a community and actually get coding. It won't happen otherwise... (At least not for 4 years or so) > On 25 Aug 2017, at 17:34, Michael Paus <m...@jugs.org> wrote: > > I also find it important to get WebGL support into

Re: WebView and WebGL

I also find it important to get WebGL support into WebView as soon as possible but I fear that this is not such an easy task because there are a few things to consider. From my point of view, for example, it would not make much sense to implement WebGL exclusively in the context of the WebView