They're on record that their motive is disputes with Khronos, it's in some past meeting notes.
Then this should be rejected.
reject it and there will be no WebGPU for 1.5 billion iOS devices just like there is no WebGL2 for 1.5 billion iOS devices.
Why should Apple dictate their approach to everyone else then? If they are so resolved to remain outsiders technology wise because they are crazy bent on NIH, let them be outsiders.
I'd say everyone else should take a hard stance on this and show Apple to the door, instead of dancing under their tune.
It's called a "standards process" for a reason. Even if you personally have a different opinion the point of a standard is to get everyone implementing it on-board with that standard.
Releasing a standard that a major member opposes and won't implement is a pointless exercise.
When Apple adopts some technology, they don't care whether others can do the same, or what problems that will cause to others.
They might use the same medicine.
So if there won't be any consensus, then what? I see no reason to oblige Apple in this case then.
Re:WebGPU Shading Language
by imtringued on Thursday March 12, 2020 @11:25AM
(#22557802)
The motivation is to salvage SPIR-V in a way that makes Apple happy.
Except it wasn't designed to be an "optimal target for SPIR-V" -- it was designed by Apple according to Metal's semantics, to promote Metal over Vulkan, and had to be rejiggered. It's worse, by your standard, than existing, battle-proven GLSL/HLSL toolchains.
If the motivation is to replace SPIR-V itself, then it's not valid.