W3C

– DRAFT –
Immersive Web Working Group Teleconference - 2020-06-23

23 June 2020

Attendees

Present
cabanier, cwilso, kip, Leonard, Manishearth, yonet
Regrets
-
Chair
Ada
Scribe
Leonard

Meeting minutes

@Manishearth: No one is speaking

Now Chris is...

<cwilso> yes, I am now?

https://‌github.com/‌immersive-web/‌webxr/‌pull/‌1088

<Manishearth> alrght i can't hear

Delaying for resolution of technical audio issues

webxr#1088 Allow caching various objects (take 2); To discuss how people feel about unconditionally caching, and whether there's anything that can be done about poses [Manishearth]

Manish: Every animation frame creates a bunch of objects

<Manishearth> https://‌github.com/‌immersive-web/‌webxr/‌issues/‌1010

Manish: causes problems with GC. Can these objects be reused from frame to frame?

Start with XRViewport, XRFrame objects and a bunch others
… Current PR only caches XRViewport when viewport does not change
… This might break content (e.g., boolean) that expects the objects to be deleted
… Should this be mandated or a UA choice? It has some impact for content.

Discussion...

<crickets>

Manish: Any allergic reactions provided it's an animation frame and viewport doesn't change?

Rik: Anything in HTML spec that allows an API to return the same object?

Manish: DOM tree is singular. There are APIs that return a specific object or something new.

Rik: APIs shouldn't impact/observe/etc GC behavior

Manish: This PR doesn't change/observe GC.

Manish: getElementByTagName may return the same object. This is OK as long as the return is not dependent on GC

Leonard: Discussion primarly based on "may" vs. "must" in determining how the UI needs to behave.

Leonard: Also note GC == garbage collection

Manish: XRFrameObject is always the same. XRViewport is the same until Viewport changes

Ada: Might anyone have a h/w issue with this?

Manish: No. Might be difficiult to determine if there is a viewport change if floating point, but currently integer

Ada: Recommends that the PR remains open until others get a chance to review it

Manish: Agrees

<Manishearth> https://‌github.com/‌immersive-web/‌webxr/‌issues/‌1085

webxr#1085 One big `secondary-views` opt-in, or an opt-in per secondary view scenario?

Manish: This written by Alex. Added secondary views capability. Used if provided or generated if not available.
… different types supported: 1st person, 3rd person, quad (2 views/eye).
… Manish & Brandon position is one big opt-in for everything with a flag indicating view type

Rik: A 3rd person would be not "head" attached

Manish: Correct. The view would be someplace else. e.g., over the shoulder, etc. Generally 3rd person view
… requires rendering of the body & head. 1st person is (usually) just body.

Rik: More for VR rather than AR. Is that an issue for definition?

Manish: No, not currently defined.

<Zakim> kip, you wanted to mention that 1str person views are often a wider FOV and have smoothed out motion for VR

Kip: Streaming frequently uses 1st person with wide FOV and low-pass to remove motion

Manish: Opt-in already exists. Secondary views are generally not good when browser created.

Rik: Eye tracking system may causes problems with rendered scene

Manish: Issue is for opt-in

Leonard: Any issues with accessibility, especially for someone with only one functioning eye

Manish: No.

Ada: No other issues, no other comments...

Meeting complete.

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 121 (Mon Jun 8 14:50:45 2020 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/rrsagent, publish log v2//

Succeeded: s/scribe Leonard//

Succeeded: s/"head/"head"/

Succeeded: i/Manish: Every animation frame creates a bunch of objects/topic: webxr#1088 Allow caching various objects (take 2); To discuss how people feel about unconditionally caching, and whether there's anything that can be done about poses [Manishearth]/

Maybe present: @Manishearth, Ada, Manish, Rik