WebView and WebGL
johnvalrose at gmail.com
Sat Sep 9 20:10:05 UTC 2017
Thanks guys - that sounds like a good "angle" to approach this :-;
I too suspected that Windows and poor OpenGL support was at the heart of the matter after the decades-long "API Wars". I just didn't realise that OpenGL on Windows was that inferior/buggy to Direct3D (by design, of course!).
I will start investigating and I definitely agree that it's not really just about WebView, although that's a good first candidate.
I guess I'm just a bit disappointed that it has only been community members who have replied on this important issue. Surely my mission will be easier if Oracle guide and assist me...
> On 10 Sep 2017, at 01:06, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
> I'm not on the FX team, but I'd suggest just starting work on it and see
> how far you get. You might duplicate some of the research the FX engineers
> are doing but you also might not, or you might find yourself being able to
> influence the direction of the project with unique input.
> If you can make WebGL work in WebKit, I guess it's not much harder to
> expose an eGL binding via JavaFX itself as WebGL is basically eGL for the
> I'd like to see GL support in JavaFX, if only because I enjoy blinging apps
> I write, including business apps! The embedded video player is invaluable
> for this sort of thing too.
> 1. Why wasn't WebGL support implemented from day zero given that WebKit
>> supports it?
> I am going to take a stab at these answers based on my relatively poor
> understanding of how JavaFX works. Answers worth what you paid for them.
> I'm going to guess that the answer is Windows.
> WebKit drawing is routed via the FX rendering layer, which is in turn an
> abstraction over OpenGL and Direct3D on Windows. Mapping OpenGL to Direct3D
> is a tricky problem that requires a sophisticated rendering layer. In order
> to make WebGL happen, Google had to do a deal with a company called
> TransGaming that had developed a translation layer between OpenGL and
> Direct3D. That layer is called ANGLE and Google open sourced it once they
> had acquired the rights.
> To support OpenGL in Java, you have two choices:
> 1) Directly expose the operating system underlying OpenGL driver.
> 2) Emulate GL on top of whatever the OS provides.
> Whenever you see OpenGL being used in Java today, the path taken is (1).
> The reason browsers use the rather odd and indirect path of number (2) is
> that on Windows OpenGL is not the native drawing layer, unlike MacOS and
> Linux, games do not typically use OpenGL and as such the GL drivers are
> often low quality, low performance and buggy. The GL driver situation is so
> poor that it is basically never a good idea to use anything other than
> DirectX on Windows. I suspect this is why JavaFX uses a dedicated Direct3D
> backend on Windows:
>> 2. Is there some significant technical issue that makes WebGL
>> implementation particularly difficult?
> Yes. See above.
>> 3. What is a brief overview of the work that needs to be done?
> To expose WebGL, you have to do what Chrome does and map GL to Direct3D
> using ANGLE. That's probably a fairly major engineering effort and requires
> the complete import of a new open source subsystem into FX.
> Note that if you do this, it'd be silly to restrict it to WebGL in WebView!
> You might as well expose a new JavaFX control that implements eGL at the
> same time, as a first step towards competing the work. That in turn would
> reduce the demand for WebGL because once you can do low level 3D graphics
> from Java directly, you don't need to go through WebKit. It'd only be
> needed for sites like Maps.
> Ultimately, I think it will be "fatal" if we have to wait another 4 years
>> or so for Java 10 to get features that are already well developed in the
>> competitor products.
> See the recent announcement by the lead Java architect that they want to
> speed up Java releases. They definitely don't want a 4 year wait for Java
> I'd suggest getting started by exploring ANGLE and reading their
> documentation and presentation materials. The path to WebGL or any form of
> GL in JavaFX lies through ANGLE.
> On 10 Sep 2017, at 02:51, Sten Nordstrom <stnordstrom at gmail.com> wrote:
> Having done some GL work on windows I've to agree with Mike. Windows GL
> drivers can be a disaster. If you are able to specify hardware for your
> users it's fine but if you take a random win-machine you are most likely in
> trouble. So something like angle would probably be the safest way to get
> EGL to work, especially as FX seems to use Direct3D on windows anyway.
> And yes, doing it as Mike proposes one would get an EGL node on the way to
> -- Sten
More information about the openjfx-dev