Re: [webkit-dev] WebVR on WebKit

2017-08-03 Thread Sergio Villar Senin 
O Xov, 03-08-2017 ás 10:56 -0700, Alexis Menard escribiu:
> Hi,
> 
> > On Aug 3, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Sergio Villar Senin  > > wrote:
> > 
> > O Xov, 03-08-2017 ás 08:44 -0700, Alexis Menard escribiu:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > > On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Dean Jackson 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > On 2 Aug 2017, at 19:55, Sergio Villar Senin  > > > > com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Our main interest is to eventually have some implementation
> > > > > working on
> > > > > WebKitGtk and/or WPE on Linux but obviously there is a lot of
> > > > > cross-
> > > > > platform work that needs to be done as well. Our initial idea
> > > > > would be
> > > > > to use the OpenVR API as Valve released a Linux version of
> > > > > their
> > > > > SDK
> > > > > some months ago. Looks like a safe bet as other vendors like
> > > > > Firefox or
> > > > > Chromium already include it in their trees as third party.
> > > > 
> > > > I agree with the idea to assume use of the OpenVR SDK at the
> > > > moment. It
> > > > is the only major VR SDK that is available for macOS, Linux and
> > > > Windows.
> > > > 
> > > > So maybe our platform API should be very similar to the OpenVR
> > > > API?
> > > > I haven't looked at other SDKs like Oculus, but hopefully it
> > > > isn't
> > > > too
> > > > different.
> > > 
> > > You should also keep an eye on OpenXR which is being discussed in
> > > Khronos. These seems like the future standard API for
> > > applications to
> > > hook into to support VR (independently of the underlaying VR
> > > runtime). More info there : https://www.khronos.org/openxr
> > 
> > Right I'm aware of that effort. The thing is that using OpenXR does
> > not
> > imply that you can get rid of native SDKs anyway. From
> > conversations I
> > had with some other people involved in WebVR efforts it looks like
> > the
> > main SDKs (like Oculus or Vive's) will be used anyway if available
> > and
> > that OpenXR would be more like a fallback for the hundreds of
> > devices
> > that will hit the market soon.
> 
> That’s correct that native VR runtimes will still be a requirements
> but they are going to be under the OpenXR application layer (read
> Oculus and Steam will most likely make their runtime OpenXR
> compliant). The benefits of OpenXR for WebKit (or any engine) is that
> you’ll have a unique backend to talk to a VR runtime (whatever the
> user has installed).

That's clear, having a unified interface for VR is something that was
never there and one of the reasons why the market has been always that
fragmented.

> Please note that OpenXR is two folds, an application interface/API
> for applications (say in this case WebKit) to talk to a VR runtime
> and render stuff (as well as getting information from the device) and
> a Device Layer used by HMDs manufacturers (or hundred devices as you
> say) so that VR runtimes can talk to any OpenXR compliant devices.
> This will help for example SteamVR or Oculus Runtime to be compatible
> with the gazillions of devices flooding the market at some point
> provided the later are compliant with OpenXR.

Right, let's hope that those two extra layers wouldn't cause any
significant performance issue, something that is still not clear IMO.

> But OpenXR is 2018 material so indeed OpenVR is probably a good bet
> for immediate support. Please note that SteamVR allows you to use
> Oculus Rift HMD not just HTC Vive so in theory (but I haven’t tried
> it with OpenVR) you shouldn’t need a dedicated backend for Oculus.

That supports my point, but that's only for Windows (as it requires
Oculus SDK if I am not wrong), isn't it? In any case, from the WebKit's
POV, OpenVR must not be a requirement, it is just one of the potential
platform libs and we'd have to design some platform API anyway. Should
we base it on OpenVR is something that could be changed in the future
to make it more friendly for other backends (like OpenXR). After all,
all the SDKs share more or less the same concepts.

BR
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Service workers

2017-08-03 Thread Brady Eidson 

> On Aug 3, 2017, at 12:14 AM, Yusuke SUZUKI  wrote:
> 
> I've just seen some of initial work about service workers[1,2].
> So, have we started experimenting with implementing service workers?

https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/220220/webkit 


Thanks,
~Brady

> [1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175115 
> 
> [2]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175053 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Yusuke Suzuki

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] WebVR on WebKit

2017-08-03 Thread Alexis Menard 
Hi,

> On Aug 3, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Sergio Villar Senin  wrote:
> 
> O Xov, 03-08-2017 ás 08:44 -0700, Alexis Menard escribiu:
>> Hi,
>> 
>>> On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Dean Jackson  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On 2 Aug 2017, at 19:55, Sergio Villar Senin 
 wrote:
 
 
 Our main interest is to eventually have some implementation
 working on
 WebKitGtk and/or WPE on Linux but obviously there is a lot of
 cross-
 platform work that needs to be done as well. Our initial idea
 would be
 to use the OpenVR API as Valve released a Linux version of their
 SDK
 some months ago. Looks like a safe bet as other vendors like
 Firefox or
 Chromium already include it in their trees as third party.
>>> 
>>> I agree with the idea to assume use of the OpenVR SDK at the
>>> moment. It
>>> is the only major VR SDK that is available for macOS, Linux and
>>> Windows.
>>> 
>>> So maybe our platform API should be very similar to the OpenVR API?
>>> I haven't looked at other SDKs like Oculus, but hopefully it isn't
>>> too
>>> different.
>> 
>> You should also keep an eye on OpenXR which is being discussed in
>> Khronos. These seems like the future standard API for applications to
>> hook into to support VR (independently of the underlaying VR
>> runtime). More info there : https://www.khronos.org/openxr
> 
> Right I'm aware of that effort. The thing is that using OpenXR does not
> imply that you can get rid of native SDKs anyway. From conversations I
> had with some other people involved in WebVR efforts it looks like the
> main SDKs (like Oculus or Vive's) will be used anyway if available and
> that OpenXR would be more like a fallback for the hundreds of devices
> that will hit the market soon.

That’s correct that native VR runtimes will still be a requirements but they 
are going to be under the OpenXR application layer (read Oculus and Steam will 
most likely make their runtime OpenXR compliant). The benefits of OpenXR for 
WebKit (or any engine) is that you’ll have a unique backend to talk to a VR 
runtime (whatever the user has installed).

Please note that OpenXR is two folds, an application interface/API for 
applications (say in this case WebKit) to talk to a VR runtime and render stuff 
(as well as getting information from the device) and a Device Layer used by 
HMDs manufacturers (or hundred devices as you say) so that VR runtimes can talk 
to any OpenXR compliant devices. This will help for example SteamVR or Oculus 
Runtime to be compatible with the gazillions of devices flooding the market at 
some point provided the later are compliant with OpenXR.

But OpenXR is 2018 material so indeed OpenVR is probably a good bet for 
immediate support. Please note that SteamVR allows you to use Oculus Rift HMD 
not just HTC Vive so in theory (but I haven’t tried it with OpenVR) you 
shouldn’t need a dedicated backend for Oculus.

> 
> BR

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] WebVR on WebKit

2017-08-03 Thread Sergio Villar Senin 
O Xov, 03-08-2017 ás 08:44 -0700, Alexis Menard escribiu:
> Hi,
> 
> > On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Dean Jackson  wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > On 2 Aug 2017, at 19:55, Sergio Villar Senin 
> > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Our main interest is to eventually have some implementation
> > > working on
> > > WebKitGtk and/or WPE on Linux but obviously there is a lot of
> > > cross-
> > > platform work that needs to be done as well. Our initial idea
> > > would be
> > > to use the OpenVR API as Valve released a Linux version of their
> > > SDK
> > > some months ago. Looks like a safe bet as other vendors like
> > > Firefox or
> > > Chromium already include it in their trees as third party.
> > 
> > I agree with the idea to assume use of the OpenVR SDK at the
> > moment. It
> > is the only major VR SDK that is available for macOS, Linux and
> > Windows.
> > 
> > So maybe our platform API should be very similar to the OpenVR API?
> > I haven't looked at other SDKs like Oculus, but hopefully it isn't
> > too
> > different.
> 
> You should also keep an eye on OpenXR which is being discussed in
> Khronos. These seems like the future standard API for applications to
> hook into to support VR (independently of the underlaying VR
> runtime). More info there : https://www.khronos.org/openxr

Right I'm aware of that effort. The thing is that using OpenXR does not
imply that you can get rid of native SDKs anyway. From conversations I
had with some other people involved in WebVR efforts it looks like the
main SDKs (like Oculus or Vive's) will be used anyway if available and
that OpenXR would be more like a fallback for the hundreds of devices
that will hit the market soon.

BR
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] WebVR on WebKit

2017-08-03 Thread Alexis Menard 
Hi,

> On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Dean Jackson  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2 Aug 2017, at 19:55, Sergio Villar Senin  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Our main interest is to eventually have some implementation working on
>> WebKitGtk and/or WPE on Linux but obviously there is a lot of cross-
>> platform work that needs to be done as well. Our initial idea would be
>> to use the OpenVR API as Valve released a Linux version of their SDK
>> some months ago. Looks like a safe bet as other vendors like Firefox or
>> Chromium already include it in their trees as third party.
> 
> I agree with the idea to assume use of the OpenVR SDK at the moment. It
> is the only major VR SDK that is available for macOS, Linux and Windows.
> 
> So maybe our platform API should be very similar to the OpenVR API?
> I haven't looked at other SDKs like Oculus, but hopefully it isn't too
> different.

You should also keep an eye on OpenXR which is being discussed in Khronos. 
These seems like the future standard API for applications to hook into to 
support VR (independently of the underlaying VR runtime). More info there : 
https://www.khronos.org/openxr 
> 
> Dean
> 
> 
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] WebVR on WebKit

2017-08-03 Thread Dean Jackson 


> On 2 Aug 2017, at 19:55, Sergio Villar Senin  wrote:
> 
> 
> Our main interest is to eventually have some implementation working on
> WebKitGtk and/or WPE on Linux but obviously there is a lot of cross-
> platform work that needs to be done as well. Our initial idea would be
> to use the OpenVR API as Valve released a Linux version of their SDK
> some months ago. Looks like a safe bet as other vendors like Firefox or
> Chromium already include it in their trees as third party.

I agree with the idea to assume use of the OpenVR SDK at the moment. It
is the only major VR SDK that is available for macOS, Linux and Windows.

So maybe our platform API should be very similar to the OpenVR API?
I haven't looked at other SDKs like Oculus, but hopefully it isn't too
different.

Dean


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Service workers

2017-08-03 Thread Yusuke SUZUKI 
I've just seen some of initial work about service workers[1,2].
So, have we started experimenting with implementing service workers?

[1]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175115
[2]: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175053

Best regards,
Yusuke Suzuki

On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 4:55 AM, Maciej Stachowiak  wrote:

>
>
> > On Jul 13, 2017, at 6:19 PM, Michael Catanzaro 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We've noticed that service worker support has more than once been a
> consideration for embedded device manufacturers when choosing between
> WebKit and Chromium for their products. I see the feature status for
> service workers is currently listed as "under consideration." Are there
> technical concerns with this spec? Is it something that would be desirable
> for WebKit?
>
> Apple engineers from the WebKit team have been heavily involved in
> ServiceWorkers spec discussions over the past few years. Many of our
> concerns with the spec have been addressed, especially for Fetch service
> workers which generally don't run beyond the scope of pages that use them.
> While we have not done any implementation work, the "under consideration"
> in this case is meant literally. We actually are considering it.
>
> More info about who's asking for it and what their use cases are would be
> useful, if you're free to share.
>
> Regards,
> Maciej
>
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev