IRC log of immersive-web on 2020-06-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:00:21 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #immersive-web
18:00:21 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-irc
18:01:01 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #immersive-web
18:18:27 [yonet]
present+
18:19:06 [yonet]
chair: cwilson
18:20:30 [yonet]
Agenda: https://github.com/immersive-web/administrivia/blob/master/meetings/cg/2020-06-23-Immersive_Web_Community_Group_Teleconference-agenda.md
18:21:33 [yonet]
Date: 16 June 2020
18:26:31 [yonet]
Zakim, this is immersive-web
18:26:31 [Zakim]
got it, yonet
18:53:53 [atsushi]
meeting: Immersive Web Community Group
18:54:00 [atsushi]
rrsagent, make log public
18:54:09 [atsushi]
rrsagent, publish minutes v2
18:54:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi
18:55:49 [atsushi]
previous meeting: https://www.w3.org/2020/05-19-immersive-web-minutes.html
18:57:22 [atsushi]
zakim, list agenda
18:57:22 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
18:57:47 [atsushi]
agenda+ layers#154 first pass at hit testing; discuss the current hit test proposal [cabanier]
18:58:14 [atsushi]
agenda+ layers#158 Layers on devices with views of different resolutions; how should we handle views from different devices (ie eye displays + observer) [cabanier]
18:58:32 [Leonard]
Leonard has joined #immersive-web
18:58:36 [atsushi]
agenda+ layers#163 Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?; Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views? [cabanier]
18:58:38 [atsushi]
zakim, list agenda
18:58:38 [Zakim]
I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
18:58:39 [Zakim]
1. layers#154 first pass at hit testing; discuss the current hit test proposal [from cabanier via atsushi]
18:58:39 [Zakim]
2. layers#158 Layers on devices with views of different resolutions; how should we handle views from different devices (ie eye displays + observer) [from cabanier via atsushi]
18:58:39 [Zakim]
3. layers#163 Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?; Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views? [from cabanier via atsushi]
18:59:16 [kip]
kip has joined #immersive-web
18:59:26 [Leonard]
present+
19:00:05 [bajones]
bajones has joined #Immersive-Web
19:00:27 [kip]
present+
19:01:55 [cwilso]
present+
19:02:15 [yonet]
take up agendum 3
19:02:27 [cabanier_]
cabanier_ has joined #immersive-web
19:03:22 [cwilso]
zakim, choose a victim
19:03:22 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose cwilso
19:03:29 [cwilso]
zakim, choose a victim
19:03:29 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Leonard
19:03:39 [cabanier_]
present+
19:03:43 [cwilso]
zakim, choose a victim
19:03:43 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Leonard
19:03:45 [bajones]
present+
19:03:49 [cwilso]
zakim, choose a victim
19:03:49 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose cwilso
19:03:55 [cwilso]
zakim, who is here?
19:03:55 [Zakim]
Present: yonet, Leonard, kip, cwilso, cabanier_, bajones
19:03:57 [Zakim]
On IRC I see cabanier_, bajones, kip, Leonard, Zakim, RRSAgent, yonet, Karen, atsushi, sangwhan_, trevorfsmith, sheppy, surma, Manishearth, mounir, ada, flaki, bertf, garykac,
19:03:57 [Zakim]
... iank_, NellWaliczek, cwilso
19:04:04 [cwilso]
zakim, choose a victim
19:04:04 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose kip
19:04:11 [trevorfsmith]
present+
19:04:13 [Manishearth]
present+
19:04:17 [cabanier]
present+
19:04:36 [cwilso]
scribenick: manishearth
19:04:54 [Manishearth]
Zakim, take up agendum 1
19:04:54 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "layers#154 first pass at hit testing; discuss the current hit test proposal" taken up [from cabanier via atsushi]
19:05:09 [cabanier]
https://github.com/immersive-web/layers/pull/154
19:05:09 [cwilso]
https://github.com/immersive-web/layers/issues/163
19:05:27 [cwilso]
q?
19:05:28 [Manishearth]
cabanier: i've created a strawman proposal for hit testing in layers
19:05:30 [Manishearth]
q+
19:05:44 [bajones]
q+
19:05:46 [Manishearth]
cabanier: which describes what layer was hit, and where on the layer it was hit, along with where in 3d space it was hit
19:05:49 [Manishearth]
q-
19:05:50 [Manishearth]
q+
19:06:06 [Manishearth]
cabanier: also extended xrframe so that you can pass a space+array and it returns a list of those dictionaries
19:06:35 [Manishearth]
cabanier: since everything is known there it can be synchronous
19:06:58 [bialpio]
bialpio has joined #immersive-web
19:07:13 [alexturn]
alexturn has joined #immersive-web
19:07:14 [cwilso]
ack bajones
19:07:17 [Manishearth]
cabanier: manish suggestd an event based api but the issue is that the event may fire too late
19:07:50 [Manishearth]
bajones: we should note that we have skipped a bit ahead in the agenda. rik is discussing the second agenda item
19:08:05 [RafaelCintron]
RafaelCintron has joined #immersive-web
19:08:06 [Manishearth]
bajones: for hit testng itself it's tempting to find parallels with world geometry
19:08:07 [kip]
[Just saw that Zakim chose me while reconnecting...
19:08:10 [kip]
Will scribe...
19:08:14 [Manishearth]
... but different in that the client side knows all the info in this case
19:08:22 [kip]
brandon: You can probably successfully offload this to a library
19:08:31 [cwilso]
zakim, take up agendum2
19:08:31 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "layers#158 Layers on devices with views of different resolutions; how should we handle views from different devices (ie eye displays + observer)" taken up [from
19:08:34 [Zakim]
... cabanier via atsushi]
19:08:36 [cwilso]
zakim, take up agendum 3
19:08:36 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "layers#163 Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?; Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?" taken up [from cabanier via atsushi]
19:08:40 [cwilso]
zakim, take up agendum 1
19:08:40 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "layers#154 first pass at hit testing; discuss the current hit test proposal" taken up [from cabanier via atsushi]
19:08:49 [kip]
... because as long as we do a decent job of defining what shape the parameters are in, gives out, the math behind this is a bit of a pain, but is not anything that can't be solved in JS
19:09:00 [kip]
... Not certain that is the right way to go, off to a library, but is a valid option for this case
19:09:00 [Manishearth]
bajones: the math for this is probably something that you can maybe offload to JS. but it might be a perfectly valid option
19:09:14 [Manishearth]
bajones: by the same token we don't need a big long subscription event based thing when we're talking about this
19:09:23 [Manishearth]
bajones: because everything can be figured out on the client side
19:09:36 [Manishearth]
... so not enturely sue if the event is necessary here
19:09:47 [kip]
Thanks for scribing Manishearth, I'll take over during your talk
19:09:49 [Manishearth]
... unless there was some kind of DOM input on the layer and there was a security reason
19:10:11 [Manishearth]
bajones: final thought. i see a formulation of "find hit test", which will loop through all layers
19:10:39 [Manishearth]
... i wonder if given the way you could use this, and given that everything is client side, we should make this a property of the layer itself, "for this frame this space/etc, where did i hit?"
19:10:50 [Manishearth]
... then we don't need to worry about sequences etc
19:10:51 [cabanier]
q+
19:11:12 [Manishearth]
bajones: not aware of any native API equivalents to this that might dictate this particular design
19:11:17 [Manishearth]
... something i'm missing here, rik?
19:11:26 [Manishearth]
cabanier: not that i think so. this won't be done in the native api
19:11:33 [cwilso]
ack manish
19:11:39 [kip]
manishearth: Clarifications
19:11:47 [kip]
... Not suggesting a subscription events based model
19:11:54 [kip]
... HAve preferred pointing ray field in on XRInputSources
19:12:00 [kip]
... Used to trigger events, similar to select events
19:12:03 [kip]
... Come with their own frame
19:12:07 [kip]
... Can do most operations you want to
19:12:19 [kip]
... Idea is to have a preferred pointing ray on XRInputSource anyways
19:12:27 [kip]
... For example, application is doing offset stuff
19:12:34 [kip]
... Not using target ray space, but using offset
19:12:38 [kip]
... Useful for DOM Overlay
19:12:45 [kip]
... Click events based on offset ray rather than target ray space
19:12:57 [kip]
... WebXR spec does not specify pointing ray
19:13:02 [kip]
... Having field is useful. Can have event api
19:13:07 [kip]
... Subscription based model seems heavy
19:13:16 [kip]
... For utility, per frame thing, here's space and ray...
19:13:23 [kip]
... Give me intersection in this space. That would work
19:13:34 [kip]
... Event thing would be, due to needing for DOM Overlay anyways
19:13:38 [kip]
... Unifying would be nice
19:13:44 [cwilso]
ack cab
19:13:48 [kip]
Rik: Makes a lot of sense to have hit test on layer
19:13:52 [kip]
... Could be multiple layers
19:14:06 [bajones]
q+
19:14:07 [kip]
... Equirect layer wouldn't want to hit. Just quads and cylinders
19:14:12 [kip]
... Could be fine with that change
19:14:21 [kip]
... Originally proposed in library. At time people objected
19:14:21 [Manishearth]
q+
19:14:26 [kip]
... Library might be the way to go
19:14:29 [alexturn]
q+
19:14:32 [kip]
... Didn't want to revisit
19:14:36 [alexturn]
present+
19:14:42 [cwilso]
ack bajones
19:14:43 [kip]
... Could be that some UA's might place the layers slightly differently. Would all fall done
19:14:51 [kip]
bajones: Coulple of notes based on what said
19:15:02 [kip]
... First, Rik saying that different UA's place layers differently
19:15:11 [kip]
... Would be concerned if the case, could happen, but ideally shouldn't
19:15:23 [kip]
... Good way to get bugs. Might see seams of black edges
19:15:47 [kip]
... In this case (Manish's), there may be intersection point other than pointing ray
19:15:50 [kip]
... Use for basic physics
19:16:06 [kip]
... Someone could do multiuser environment. Raytrace their pointer to surface, from network
19:16:14 [kip]
... detaching from input sources is decent idea
19:16:23 [kip]
... To Rik's idea on library. Given that it can be library.
19:16:28 [kip]
... Layering module already complicated
19:16:46 [kip]
... Would not object personally.. Good idea, but maybe for backburner. See what kind of feedback once layers out in the open
19:16:57 [cabanier]
q+
19:17:00 [kip]
... Take time to build up intersection library ourselves as we need to anyways. See what works for people
19:17:05 [kip]
... Additive layer on,
19:17:12 [kip]
... Will have better idea later
19:17:14 [cwilso]
ack next
19:17:20 [kip]
Manish: Want to mention that would prefer a library
19:17:23 [cwilso]
ack manish
19:17:36 [kip]
... Pushing for discussion to happen as DOM overlay gives event.. Screen space... Multiple things giving X,Y coordinates
19:17:43 [kip]
... Realized that this may be potential option
19:17:53 [cwilso]
ack alex
19:17:55 [kip]
... Potential of unification interests me. If not doing that, then library is fine
19:18:04 [kip]
alex: Chime in for library
19:18:17 [kip]
... Something inside the UA feels like opportunity to address subtle differences
19:18:27 [kip]
... Apps will generally need to raycast against layers and scene geometry
19:18:32 [kip]
... Will need to do both predictably
19:18:41 [kip]
... Expect them to raycast against scene representation
19:18:57 [cwilso]
ack cab
19:18:58 [kip]
... Just happen to use layers to render part of the scene, but would need to do that in their engine and have predictable outcome
19:19:08 [kip]
Rik: Getting started on polyfill for layers
19:19:22 [kip]
... One of first things would be to make hit testing part of that polyfill
19:19:27 [kip]
... If others interested, can work with them
19:19:31 [kip]
... Otherwise will work on this
19:19:46 [cwilso]
zakim, close agendum 1
19:19:46 [Zakim]
agendum 1, layers#154 first pass at hit testing; discuss the current hit test proposal, closed
19:19:48 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
19:19:48 [Zakim]
2. layers#158 Layers on devices with views of different resolutions; how should we handle views from different devices (ie eye displays + observer) [from cabanier via atsushi]
19:19:56 [kip]
cwilso: Next item
19:20:04 [kip]
... Cover 163, Rik?
19:20:20 [kip]
Rik: Don't have solution to this one
19:20:21 [cwilso]
zakim, take up agendum 2
19:20:21 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "layers#158 Layers on devices with views of different resolutions; how should we handle views from different devices (ie eye displays + observer)" taken up [from
19:20:24 [Zakim]
... cabanier via atsushi]
19:20:31 [kip]
... Now if create texture array, we assume every view has the same resolution
19:20:34 [kip]
... Not the case always
19:20:41 [kip]
... Camera resolution may be different than the displays
19:20:45 [kip]
... Don't know now how to solve for the spec
19:20:47 [Manishearth]
q+
19:20:57 [kip]
... Should we throw or make things more complicated and allow textures and separate textures
19:20:57 [alexturn]
q+
19:21:02 [kip]
... Sounds confusing
19:21:07 [kip]
... Would like to hear from alex
19:21:11 [cwilso]
ack manish
19:21:20 [kip]
manish: Also, should let alex go first...
19:21:34 [kip]
... Unfortunate result suggested throwing for texture arrays
19:21:45 [kip]
... Content supporting multiple views may not realize that using texture arrays is broken here
19:21:59 [kip]
... May be nice to request "give me texture arrays otherwise give me normal views"
19:22:11 [kip]
... This may require api change that can be backed my multiple texture arrays
19:22:17 [bajones]
q+
19:22:18 [kip]
... When getting a view you get both a texture array and index
19:22:24 [kip]
... Not sure which approach is better or necessary
19:22:32 [kip]
... Ideally content written for two views will not automatically break
19:22:34 [cwilso]
ack alex
19:22:48 [kip]
Alex: I would hope to get to, with others chiming in...
19:22:55 [kip]
... Speaking to how HoloLens does it
19:23:09 [kip]
... Optimal path to hit with layers spec -- use texture array for main stereo view. Use mono for separate things
19:23:22 [kip]
... Not third element for first person view, separate from texture array
19:23:26 [kip]
... Way the hardware works
19:23:48 [kip]
... Previous comment Manish made.. Having way for app to get texture array, but can offer something else. Reduce axes of ambiguity
19:24:14 [kip]
... If know UA is unable to support... OpenXR backed support runtimes support Texture Arrays, but some may be faster than others
19:24:25 [kip]
... Is required to support apps that use the paths,
19:24:29 [cabanier]
q+
19:24:35 [kip]
... Should WebXR require both texture array path and non-texture array path
19:24:45 [cwilso]
ack baj
19:24:49 [kip]
... Once you have promise that textures arrays will work
19:25:04 [kip]
bajones: I think that for us we are not worried about any UA that does not support texture arrays
19:25:08 [kip]
... Should be baseline at this point
19:25:22 [kip]
... Reason for Texture Arrays at all is for WebGL 1 based apps to support
19:25:32 [kip]
... If didn't care about WebGL 1 would say "texture arrays all the way"
19:25:52 [kip]
... Scenerio to consider is not just HoloLens observer view, but also ... [missed] have four views.. Higher inset views
19:25:57 [cabanier]
q-
19:26:01 [kip]
... People working on [barro?}
19:26:14 [kip]
... In both cases, said that all of the primary views that you allocate are same resolution
19:26:31 [kip]
... In Barrow, smaller view is higher density but same size. Can be allocated in one go
19:26:38 [alexturn]
q+
19:26:41 [cabanier]
q+
19:26:42 [kip]
... HMD vendors seem to be aware of this
19:26:53 [kip]
... Encounter a lot of that, but maybe can't count on it, such as with HoloLens observer
19:27:03 [kip]
... Manish was wondering if we could return another texture array. Answer is yes
19:27:15 [kip]
... API as it is now, here's view and layer. Give me WebGL sub-image
19:27:21 [kip]
... Could contain texture array or something else
19:27:41 [kip]
... Would strongly recommend that if developer uses texture arrays, that we always support texture arrays. Or if textures always suppor tthat
19:27:48 [kip]
... Reduce complexty
19:27:59 [kip]
... Maybe have primary views in texture array
19:28:18 [kip]
... This will break down if developers are trying to do multi view rendering. Trying to render all views in one batch
19:28:23 [kip]
... All but one would be the same texture
19:28:39 [kip]
... Some other conversations around those observer views have a lot of discussion about people opting into that
19:28:51 [kip]
... Make contract wit h the UA that says, "I am handling these if you give them to me"
19:28:58 [kip]
... If that's the case and we're willing to be more explicity
19:29:03 [Manishearth]
q+
19:29:23 [kip]
... Clearly demark what views are non-primary, then we could get into a comfortable situation where we make guarantee where primary views are part of same texture array
19:29:29 [kip]
... MAybe we allow multiple viewports per level
19:29:34 [kip]
... There's some more discussion there
19:29:43 [kip]
... Do allow for these secondary views to be formatted a bit differently
19:29:54 [kip]
... Need to be aware of that when develop it. MAke sure app handles properly and test
19:30:04 [cwilso]
ack alex
19:30:13 [kip]
alex: Comment.. Great point about vario
19:30:17 [kip]
... Two notions of WebXR
19:30:21 [kip]
... Primary view configs
19:30:24 [alexturn]
OpenXR Varjo primary quad views: https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenXR/specs/1.0/html/xrspec.html#XR_VARJO_quad_views
19:30:27 [kip]
... Mono view device or stereo view device
19:30:39 [kip]
... Extension enables new primary, four views
19:30:44 [kip]
... Independently notion of secondary views
19:30:45 [alexturn]
OpenXR secondary views: https://www.khronos.org/registry/OpenXR/specs/1.0/html/xrspec.html#XR_MSFT_secondary_view_configuration
19:31:02 [kip]
... Secondary view system that proposing is reviving some things from spec that was excised for 1.0
19:31:06 [kip]
... Bringing back as an extension
19:31:18 [kip]
... Introduces more machinery for secondary views
19:31:23 [kip]
... May be a simpler opt-in
19:31:30 [kip]
... Give me 4 primary views in texture arrays
19:31:42 [kip]
... Option to provide primary and secondary array with different resolution and render paths
19:31:49 [kip]
... Can't just be another element in the texture array
19:31:52 [yonet]
q?
19:31:59 [kip]
... Okay to be a separate context.. This is where we are landing in OpenXR
19:32:07 [yonet]
ack cab
19:32:11 [kip]
Rik: Sounds like we are all getting agreement that we should not throw
19:32:17 [kip]
... And for primary views we should create texture array
19:32:24 [kip]
... Secondary views should be texture array but separate
19:32:28 [kip]
... PAge should opt in
19:32:33 [kip]
... for secondary views
19:32:38 [kip]
... Should page opt in for secondary views?
19:32:41 [kip]
... Was pushback
19:32:46 [kip]
... Now we are starting to differentiate
19:32:51 [kip]
... With layers spec
19:32:58 [kip]
... In order to do that we need to define that somewhere
19:33:03 [kip]
... Should be defined in WebXR spec
19:33:13 [kip]
manish: This dovetails into.
19:33:17 [yonet]
ack manishearth
19:33:26 [kip]
... My PR on spec ties into what OpenxR calls secondary views
19:33:35 [kip]
... I and brandon are concerned about primary and secondary language
19:33:39 [cabanier]
q+
19:33:59 [kip]
... Additional views concept. In layer spec can say "here's an additional thing you should handle"
19:34:07 [kip]
... We could have a line like this here as well
19:34:25 [kip]
... Not all cases where you have two views , eg in a C.A.V.E system / first person system, device can reproject
19:34:30 [kip]
... Give you that view without surfacing to JS
19:34:39 [kip]
... In C.A.V.E. has to give all views. can't extrapolate
19:34:54 [kip]
... Similar situation where want to make distinction between multiple primary views and additional views that can be ignored
19:34:54 [alexturn]
q+
19:34:59 [yonet]
ack cab
19:35:03 [kip]
... Concept of additional views candles this
19:35:17 [kip]
Rik: Under impression that additional views means you have more than two views
19:35:27 [kip]
... In C.A.V.E. can have 4.. Doesn't seem to match up.
19:35:38 [kip]
... Primary views are what observer sees.
19:35:46 [kip]
manish: Way I tried to spec lets that distinction exist
19:36:00 [kip]
... Not clear but the way is specced, additional views means "not your normal views". Can change that
19:36:10 [bajones]
q+
19:36:13 [alexturn]
q-
19:36:13 [kip]
... to "primary / secondary"
19:36:13 [kip]
Rik: Changes make sense
19:36:28 [yonet]
ack alexturn
19:36:29 [kip]
manish: Concept invented for this may not be useful for layers. Can change that concept so it works
19:36:32 [Manishearth]
q?
19:36:44 [yonet]
ack bajones
19:37:00 [kip]
bajones: Say really quickly that I do think distinction between primary and secondary views is more necessary given this conversation
19:37:03 [kip]
manish: Can do that
19:37:10 [Manishearth]
q+
19:37:12 [kip]
Rik: Can change layers spec so is not so confusing
19:37:16 [yonet]
ack manish
19:37:35 [alexturn]
q+
19:37:39 [kip]
manish: Quick question - I am defining primary views as things that you must render to. Do we expect a case where primary views have different resolutions?
19:37:47 [kip]
... Maybe in a C.A.V.E. system? Might be other systems?
19:37:54 [kip]
... Kicking a can for cave systems down the road here?
19:38:10 [kip]
bajones: Not aware of any systems where primary views are of a different resolution, even if not a different size
19:38:19 [kip]
... Even in cave system, is a cube. Sides all the same size
19:38:28 [kip]
... Don't see where it would need to be differing
19:38:33 [kip]
... OpenxR is ideally where things are trending
19:38:44 [kip]
... In that scenario, implemented gets to choose resolution that is passing down
19:38:56 [kip]
... WE can probably just decide that they are same resolution, but underrezzed
19:39:01 [kip]
... Compositor will figure that out
19:39:09 [kip]
... Not overtly concerned, but didn't give thought
19:39:10 [yonet]
ack alexturn
19:39:23 [kip]
alexturn: Haven't explored on HoloLens 3 element texture array
19:39:27 [kip]
... Haven't dug deep there
19:39:36 [kip]
... Reasonable to do extra pass. Not quite doing Multiview
19:39:43 [kip]
... I think would be interesting to explore
19:39:50 [kip]
... Want to prove out that we can get to reasonable performance
19:39:58 [kip]
... To see if single texture for all of them
19:40:06 [kip]
... Other side for Vario and StarVR.
19:40:17 [kip]
... Wide-left and wide-right...
19:40:21 [kip]
... Nuance for additional discussion
19:40:35 [kip]
... Meaningful for runtime to know in advance.. If you opt in
19:40:51 [kip]
... IF not opt in for starVR, stereo covers central display and some of wide displays
19:40:56 [kip]
... If didn't opt in, get the same for all displays
19:41:05 [kip]
... Core 0,1 views L,R inner displays are not exactly that mapping
19:41:14 [kip]
... Need to know as a runtime/UA to know which FOV to give you
19:41:30 [kip]
... Keep in mind that is useful / valuable for runtime to know if opt-in to operate the primary views
19:41:38 [kip]
Rik: Move to next item?
19:41:39 [yonet]
next agendum
19:41:40 [kip]
Rik: Yes
19:41:47 [yonet]
move to agendum 2
19:42:04 [kip]
Rik: Currently only 2 views
19:42:08 [kip]
... One for left and right
19:42:14 [kip]
... GetSubItems for one image
19:42:20 [kip]
... Working on supporting more views
19:42:23 [kip]
... Updating layers spec
19:42:28 [kip]
... Incorrect assumption
19:42:39 [kip]
... Associating with view for stereo is incorrect assumption
19:42:51 [kip]
... Stereo means left or right, not anything to do with the view
19:42:53 [atsushi]
rrsagent, please publish minutes v2
19:42:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi
19:43:01 [kip]
... Created a PR
19:43:02 [cabanier]
https://github.com/immersive-web/layers/pull/165
19:43:07 [kip]
... To fix this
19:43:17 [kip]
... This change makes it so views are only applicable to projection layers
19:43:25 [kip]
... And you have to pass an XREye to getSubImage
19:43:37 [kip]
... Depending on if stereo or mono, pass in L+R
19:43:42 [kip]
... Manish commented on PR
19:43:45 [kip]
... Big change
19:43:52 [kip]
... MAke sure everyone is okay with this change
19:43:55 [atsushi]
i/Rik: Currently only 2 views/topic: layers#163 Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?; Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views? [from cabanier]/
19:43:56 [kip]
... Let me know if you have concerns
19:44:00 [bajones]
q+
19:44:13 [kip]
bajones: I haven't reviews the PR yet
19:44:16 [kip]
... Will do that after call
19:44:17 [yonet]
ack brajones
19:44:29 [kip]
... Worth calling out as sanity check assumption in 163
19:44:43 [kip]
... Where saying that any non-projection view, having more than two views
19:44:46 [kip]
... doesn't make sense
19:44:54 [kip]
... Mostly going to be used for static 3d images or movies
19:44:59 [kip]
... Where isn't more than two views available
19:45:09 [kip]
... My assumption on top of that is that if you wanted to do something like a portal
19:45:14 [kip]
... Might not be best place for layering system
19:45:14 [Manishearth]
q+
19:45:21 [Manishearth]
ack ba
19:45:22 [kip]
... Probably want to use more traditional means with stencil
19:45:34 [kip]
... Worth doing quick feeling for room to see if everyone agrees with those assertions
19:45:49 [kip]
... With quad and cylinder, anything more than a strict L+R stereo does not make sense
19:45:50 [yonet]
q?
19:45:54 [kip]
... Anyone disagree with that
19:46:14 [yonet]
ack Manisheart
19:46:16 [kip]
manish: My initial pushback was based on not understanding why non-projection views would want stereo
19:46:23 [kip]
... 3d nature of that would be very weird
19:46:32 [alexturn]
q+
19:46:33 [kip]
... In case of taking existing content formatted like that, maybe useful
19:46:36 [kip]
... Agree with PR
19:46:46 [kip]
alexturn: Generally I think this will cover most use cases
19:46:48 [yonet]
ack alexturn
19:47:05 [kip]
... If you make a quad layer, you can say if on left-eye-view or right-eye-view, but don't control view visibility
19:47:11 [kip]
... Might be okay
19:47:28 [kip]
... May use a quad to do an observer view. Maybe observer view renders differently
19:47:36 [cabanier]
q+
19:47:40 [kip]
... Do we need that flexibility for things like quad layers, or say that it appears in all views?
19:47:55 [kip]
... Maybe complexity can be added layer if we need it. Calling out that this limitation exists with this approach
19:47:58 [yonet]
ack cab
19:48:00 [kip]
Rik: I don't think this is limitation
19:48:06 [kip]
... Quad layer will still be composited
19:48:10 [kip]
... If in world space of camera
19:48:14 [kip]
... Will be in correct spots
19:48:26 [kip]
... The only thing that would.. if stereo layer, which would you pick
19:48:47 [kip]
rik: do we have cases where we would want to exclude the quad layers?
19:49:02 [kip]
... If just projection layers, then app may exclude arbitrary geometry in scene to tweak for observers
19:49:16 [kip]
... Lost flexibility.. Once using quad layer, then content must appear in all views
19:49:23 [kip]
... Don't have concrete example of what would be blocked
19:49:32 [kip]
... Functionality in OpenXR that is not represented here
19:49:42 [kip]
... Not strong objection, but is an artifact to note here
19:49:47 [kip]
... Worth filing for async discussion
19:52:09 [atsushi]
i/manishearth: Clarifications/scribe: kip/
19:52:12 [atsushi]
rrsagent, please publish minutes v2
19:52:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi
20:01:47 [atsushi]
i/brandon: You can probably successfully /scribe: kip/
20:01:50 [atsushi]
rrsagent, please publish minutes v2
20:01:50 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi
20:02:21 [atsushi]
i/bajones: the math for this/scribe: Manishearth/
20:02:23 [atsushi]
rrsagent, please publish minutes v2
20:02:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi
20:12:12 [atsushi]
s|agendum 3. "layers#163 Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?; Should non-projection layers support more than 2 views?" taken up [from cabanier via atsushi]||
20:12:16 [atsushi]
rrsagent, please publish minutes v2
20:12:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2020/06/16-immersive-web-minutes.html atsushi