51–60 of 241 posts
WebGL exists, why do we need a budget restricted version of a model viewer in the browser? None of the motivations are at all convincing. Should browsers now be obliged to integrate with VR headsets?
WebGL support on safari is ropey at best why would apple implement a standard written by some one else when they can create a new standard no one asked for?
But also, it'd be pretty cool if this was implemented as a browser extension, that way it could be much faster to iterate over.
I wonder why this is not common practice? Modifying browser internals is such a pain that it strikes me as odd that it is the 1 established way of going about this proposals.
Interesting. So Apple wants better browser AR support for their upcoming goggles?
Assuming I'm reading your snark correctly, is this really such a bad thing? People here seem to have a rose-tinted view of the internet's past, before Google, Apple et al. "abused" their browsers' position to push changes into the spec. I can certainly see that apparently there are a lot of HN commenters who would like to go back to the days of IE and no real web technologies or much progress, but I think practically…
Not fan of the prospect of Apple doing the same. If I wanted to make what Apple is making, I would have to rely on webgl. Them inventing something for their own use case when other stuff exists feels just unnecessary. Their proposal also includes a 3d format no one uses (except them I guess), as an attempt to shoehorn it in or something.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is basically that DRM is the technology that permits the existence of Netflix and similar. Perhaps I just lack a strength of principle, but I don't see why you'd remove one of the most-enjoyed aspects of the internet for the sake of uh... some kind of privacy-adjacent something?
We got to an ok compromise of video tags and native browser support, with DRM extension for corporate needs/reqs... Is it the best? No. Could it worse, definitely. But without it youd need a Netflix app on your PC... And what safeguards does that have from hoovering my pc usage up for sale or marketing? Atleast Netflix only gets MY Netflix consumption for their metrics and ML, and isn't cross referencing the games I…
Contrast that to the now ubiquitous conferencing software solutions, and it seems like every day there's some zero-day RCE vulnerability or other spooky exploit.
If we needed to install and run a dozen different closed-source executables from BigCorp et al., I predict that we'd very soon go back to security dark-ages.
> Privacy considerations Rendered data is not exposed to / extractable by the page in this proposal, so no tainting is required. We do expect this would require extensions to Fetch (a new destination type), Content Security Policy (a new policy directive), and likely a few others. I do buy 3d model data occasionally (hobby, not for professional uses). I think most stores obfustcate the data somehow although I never t…
>I still think this is a very bad proposal. Why compare something with an image and then disallow it to be treated like other ressources? This is typically bad corporate influence on the web. Because webgl fingerprinting. Also, I'm not sure why you think not being able to extract the data using javascript is "bad corporate influence on the web" or" DRM". you can still do whatever you want. The models are freely avail…
WebGL exists, why do we need a budget restricted version of a model viewer in the browser? None of the motivations are at all convincing. Should browsers now be obliged to integrate with VR headsets?
I don't think it's stranger than having a video tag even though we could embed video without it previously. Having a dedicated 3D tag would make websites more semantic. Hiding stuff in canvas tags like Googles Flutter is the wrong way to go, so bringing stuff out of canvas tags when possible should be encouraged.
Edit: I also think this can be compared to the svg tag. Sure, you could use canvas and webgl and render a 2D vector image using some javascript library. But with svg, you don't have to, and you can style it with css etc.
I don't agree with the tag name though. IMO, "model" is a singular 3D object. Such a tag should support scenes with multiple objects in them.
Interesting. So Apple wants better browser AR support for their upcoming goggles?
WebGL exists, why do we need a budget restricted version of a model viewer in the browser? None of the motivations are at all convincing. Should browsers now be obliged to integrate with VR headsets?