home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30 / NN_1992_30.iso / spool / comp / graphics / opengl / 211 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1992-12-15  |  936 b   |  25 lines
  1. Newsgroups: comp.graphics.opengl
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!orca!mesa!rthomson
  3. From: rthomson@mesa.dsd.es.com (Rich Thomson)
  4. Subject: conformance question
  5. Message-ID: <1992Dec15.074053.1837@dsd.es.com>
  6. Sender: usenet@dsd.es.com
  7. Nntp-Posting-Host: 130.187.85.21
  8. Organization: Design Systems Division, Evans & Sutherland, SLC, UT
  9. Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 07:40:53 GMT
  10. Lines: 13
  11.  
  12. Would an OpenGL implementation that did not provide double buffering,
  13. depth (Z) buffering, stencil buffering nor accumulation buffering be
  14. conformant with the OpenGL specification?  (In other words, it would
  15. only provide a "front left" buffer for rendering.)
  16.  
  17. If the answer is yes, how is this different from subsetting?
  18.  
  19.                         -- Rich
  20. -- 
  21.               Don't blame me; I voted Libertarian
  22. Disclaimer: I speak for myself, except as noted; Copyright 1992 Rich Thomson
  23. UUCP: ...!uunet!dsd.es.com!rthomson            Rich Thomson
  24. Internet: rthomson@dsd.es.com    IRC: _Rich_        PEXt Programmer
  25.