Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on macOS

2018-10-11 Thread kgilbert
On Tuesday, February 27, 2018 at 12:51:46 PM UTC-8, kear...@kearwood.com wrote: > On Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 4:30:56 PM UTC-7, Kearwood Kip Gilbert > wrote: > > As of 2017-10-01, I intend to turn WebVR on by default for macOS. It has > > been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on macOS

2018-02-27 Thread kearwood
On Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 4:30:56 PM UTC-7, Kearwood Kip Gilbert wrote: > As of 2017-10-01, I intend to turn WebVR on by default for macOS. It has > been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference. We have already shipped > WebVR by default for the Windows platform. macOS

Intent to ship: WebVR on macOS

2017-09-20 Thread Kearwood Kip Gilbert
As of 2017-10-01, I intend to turn WebVR on by default for macOS. It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference. We have already shipped WebVR by default for the Windows platform. macOS support has been implemented for several months but disabled by default. Our WebVR

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-04-13 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
We believe that we have addressed the remaining issues and we will turn WebVR on by default in Windows, shipping in Firefox 55. After discussions with the other major browser vendors, we believe that we are all on track to ship a compatible version of the WebVR 1.1 draft specification and have

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-08 Thread bajones
Hi all! I'm a spec editor for WebVR and implementer on Chrome. Wanted to chime in on a few points. Boris: Thanks for the spec bugs you've filed and the concern about improving the spec language to ensure consistent implementations between browsers. The type of issues you have brought up are

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-06 Thread kearwood
On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 12:15:25 PM UTC-8, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 3/6/17 3:03 PM, kearw...@kearwood.com wrote: > > The underlying VR API's expect this process to persist for the browser's > > lifespan and to have mutually-exclusive access to input from the headsets. > > It seems that the

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-06 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/6/17 3:03 PM, kearw...@kearwood.com wrote: The underlying VR API's expect this process to persist for the browser's lifespan and to have mutually-exclusive access to input from the headsets. It seems that the GPU process is the best fit afaict. In case it matters, the GPU process does

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-06 Thread kearwood
On Friday, March 3, 2017 at 10:42:43 AM UTC-8, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:36 PM, wrote: > > > Hi Ehsan! > > > > I believe all IPC messages can be changed to async except GetSensorState > > and SubmitFrame. We cache the results from GetSensorState and

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-03 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:36 PM, wrote: > Hi Ehsan! > > I believe all IPC messages can be changed to async except GetSensorState > and SubmitFrame. We cache the results from GetSensorState and re-use it > until the next frame. > Hmm, not sure if I understand correctly.

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-03 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
Hi Kearwood, I and a few other engineers have been studying the performance of Firefox for several weeks now as part of the Quantum Flow project and one of the serious performance issues that we have been finding in various parts of the browser have been synchronous IPC messages sent from the

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-02 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/2/17 1:52 PM, kearw...@kearwood.com wrote: I tend to agree with Brandon on this particular issue That's fine. I agree with you and Brandon too. ;) I'm just worried about possible interop problems more than anything else at the moment. Would this issue block release of WebVR in

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-02 Thread kearwood
On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 11:04:07 AM UTC-8, David Baron wrote: > On Wednesday 2017-03-01 12:50 -0800, kgilb...@mozilla.com wrote: > > Since the initial implementation, a W3C working group was formed including > > members from Mozilla, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, and Oculus.  The API has > >

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-02 Thread L. David Baron
On Wednesday 2017-03-01 12:50 -0800, kgilb...@mozilla.com wrote: > Since the initial implementation, a W3C working group was formed including > members from Mozilla, Google, Microsoft, Samsung, and Oculus.  The API has > stabilized and is frozen at "WebVR 1.1" while its successor "WebVR 2.0" is

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-02 Thread kearwood
On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 2:55:53 PM UTC-8, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > On 3/1/17 5:03 PM, Kip Gilbert wrote: > > We have worked directly with the other WebVR platform implementers to > > ensure compatibility. > > OK, but what is the actual state of that compatibility? > >

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-01 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 3/1/17 5:03 PM, Kip Gilbert wrote: We have worked directly with the other WebVR platform implementers to ensure compatibility. OK, but what is the actual state of that compatibility? https://github.com/w3c/webvr/issues/197#issuecomment-283492774 and

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-01 Thread Kip Gilbert
Sent from my iPad > On Mar 1, 2017, at 1:32 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote: > >> On 3/1/17 3:50 PM, kgilb...@mozilla.com wrote: >> As of March 1, 2017 I intend to turn WebVR on by default on Windows. > > So flip the pref on Windows only, right? Yes, flipping pref on only for

Intent to ship: WebVR on Windows in Release

2017-03-01 Thread kgilbert
As of March 1, 2017 I intend to turn WebVR on by default on Windows.  It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference and has been enabled by default on Firefox Nightly and Dev Edition since November 2015.  Other UAs shipping this include Samsung Internet Browser (Gear VR) and Oculus

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-30 Thread Gervase Markham
On 29/10/15 17:07, vladi...@mozilla.com wrote: >> At one point, integrating with available hardware required us to use >> proprietary code. Is shipping proprietary code in Firefox any part of >> this plan, or not? > > No. Awesome! :-) Gerv ___

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-29 Thread vladimir
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 9:39:57 PM UTC-4, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > First things first, congratulations on getting this close! > > What's the status of the specification? I just had a quick skim and it > seems extremely light on details. The spec is still a draft, and the API is expected

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-29 Thread vladimir
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 11:38:26 AM UTC-4, Gervase Markham wrote: > On 26/10/15 19:19, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote: > > As of Oct 29, 2015 I intend to turn WebVR on by default for all > > platforms. It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference. > > A compatible API has

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-29 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On 2015-10-29 1:10 PM, vladi...@mozilla.com wrote: On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 9:39:57 PM UTC-4, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: First things first, congratulations on getting this close! What's the status of the specification? I just had a quick skim and it seems extremely light on details. The

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-29 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 10/29/15 1:10 PM, vladi...@mozilla.com wrote: The intent to ship here is a bit premature; the intent is to pref it on in nightly & aurora, not ship it all the way to release. OK. The patches in the "enable it" bugs are enabling on all branches; we should probably scale that back to just

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-28 Thread Gervase Markham
On 26/10/15 19:19, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert wrote: > As of Oct 29, 2015 I intend to turn WebVR on by default for all > platforms. It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference. > A compatible API has been implemented (but not yet shipped) in Chromium > and Blink. At one point,

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-26 Thread Jet Villegas
Let the record state that Firefox is first to deliver Web Virtual Reality to Planet Earth. On to other (virtual) worlds... Congratulations, VR Team! \o/ --Jet On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert < kgilb...@mozilla.com> wrote: > As of Oct 29, 2015 I intend to turn WebVR on

Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-26 Thread Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert
As of Oct 29, 2015 I intend to turn WebVR on by default for all platforms. It has been developed behind the dom.vr.enabled preference. A compatible API has been implemented (but not yet shipped) in Chromium and Blink. Bug to turn on by default:

Re: Intent to ship: WebVR

2015-10-26 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
First things first, congratulations on getting this close! What's the status of the specification? I just had a quick skim and it seems extremely light on details. There is quite a bit of details missing. The security model is essentially blank, and the descriptions in section 4 seem to be