Dan
Ingalls[hidden email],
back in Jul 11, 2011, wrote:
We have refactored the rendering architecture so that it can equally
easily support not only SVG and Canvas, but also standard HTML and
CSS.
I've had fun playing around with the
sneak peak at Lively 2.0. Seems
to work for me in Chrome. I've enjoyed poking trough the code base,
then went off and read the OMeta/JS paper. A big thank you to all
the folks that make it happen!
What prompted my revisiting lively was that I want to play with
three.js, but I have no interest in messing with HTML/CSS ... I
*think* I can get the .external HTML shape rendering to put a canvas
tag on the page, and then I *think* I can figure out how to get
webgl drawing 3d in the 'viewport'. *Then* I can connect sample
webgl/three.js programs hooked up to some simple GUI written in
Lively (My very first experiment will be -- what do these camera
controls do?). Thats my rough plan.
So my question is: How committed to the HTML/CSS rendering is the
project? Can't have canvas open with both a 2d context and a 3d
context (though if you've messed with the Secondlife client as much
as I have it is an obvious usecase.)
Of the three options for rendering, which has the best performance
currently: svg, canvas, html/css?
Jay
_______________________________________________
lively-kernel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel
Locked
