Added XRPose and related refactors to the spec #496
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
NellWaliczek
suggested changes
Jan 23, 2019
|
Addressed your feedback, Nell. Please take another look when you get a chance! |
toji
commented
Feb 4, 2019
NellWaliczek
reviewed
Feb 6, 2019
|
Addressed feedback. Please take another look, @NellWaliczek! |
NellWaliczek
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2019
This was referenced Apr 2, 2019
bors-servo
pushed a commit
to servo/servo
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2019
Update XR code to use rigid transforms and new pose/transform stuff from the spec This updates our XR code to use euclid's new [RigidTransform3D type](servo/euclid#328), which is more efficent and convenient to work with. It additionally brings us up to speed with the spec: - `XRViewerPose` was made a subclass of `XRPose` (immersive-web/webxr#496) - `XRView.viewMatrix` was removed in favor of `XRRigidTransform.inverse.matrix` (immersive-web/webxr#531) - `XRRigidTransform.inverse` is an attribute (immersive-web/webxr#560) - `XRRigidTransform` now validates positions in its constructor (immersive-web/webxr#568) Furthermore, it adds support for `XRRigidTransform.matrix`. While fixing this I also noticed that our view matrix code was incorrect, we calculated view matrices as `pose.to_column_major_array()`, whereas it *should* be `pose.inverse().to_row_major_array()` (since Euclid uses row vectors, whenever the spec says it wants a column major array we should use `.to_row_major_array()` since all web specs implicitly use column vectors). For 3DOF devices poses are mostly rotations anyway, so the effective transpose behaved _like_ an inversion, but was incorrect. This PR gets rid of `view.viewMatrix` anyway, however I felt like I should mention this discrepancy, since otherwise the replacement of `view.viewMatrix` with `view.transform.inverse.matrix` doesn't make sense r? @jdm <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/23159) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
bors-servo
pushed a commit
to servo/ser
8000
vo
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2019
Update XR code to use rigid transforms and new pose/transform stuff from the spec This updates our XR code to use euclid's new [RigidTransform3D type](servo/euclid#328), which is more efficent and convenient to work with. It additionally brings us up to speed with the spec: - `XRViewerPose` was made a subclass of `XRPose` (immersive-web/webxr#496) - `XRView.viewMatrix` was removed in favor of `XRRigidTransform.inverse.matrix` (immersive-web/webxr#531) - `XRRigidTransform.inverse` is an attribute (immersive-web/webxr#560) - `XRRigidTransform` now validates positions in its constructor (immersive-web/webxr#568) Furthermore, it adds support for `XRRigidTransform.matrix`. While fixing this I also noticed that our view matrix code was incorrect, we calculated view matrices as `pose.to_column_major_array()`, whereas it *should* be `pose.inverse().to_row_major_array()` (since Euclid uses row vectors, whenever the spec says it wants a column major array we should use `.to_row_major_array()` since all web specs implicitly use column vectors). For 3DOF devices poses are mostly rotations anyway, so the effective transpose behaved _like_ an inversion, but was incorrect. This PR gets rid of `view.viewMatrix` anyway, however I felt like I should mention this discrepancy, since otherwise the replacement of `view.viewMatrix` with `view.transform.inverse.matrix` doesn't make sense r? @jdm <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/23159) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
bors-servo
pushed a commit
to servo/servo
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2019
Update XR code to use rigid transforms and new pose/transform stuff from the spec This updates our XR code to use euclid's new [RigidTransform3D type](servo/euclid#328), which is more efficent and convenient to work with. It additionally brings us up to speed with the spec: - `XRViewerPose` was made a subclass of `XRPose` (immersive-web/webxr#496) - `XRView.viewMatrix` was removed in favor of `XRRigidTransform.inverse.matrix` (immersive-web/webxr#531) - `XRRigidTransform.inverse` is an attribute (immersive-web/webxr#560) - `XRRigidTransform` now validates positions in its constructor (immersive-web/webxr#568) Furthermore, it adds support for `XRRigidTransform.matrix`. While fixing this I also noticed that our view matrix code was incorrect, we calculated view matrices as `pose.to_column_major_array()`, whereas it *should* be `pose.inverse().to_row_major_array()` (since Euclid uses row vectors, whenever the spec says it wants a column major array we should use `.to_row_major_array()` since all web specs implicitly use column vectors). For 3DOF devices poses are mostly rotations anyway, so the effective transpose behaved _like_ an inversion, but was incorrect. This PR gets rid of `view.viewMatrix` anyway, however I felt like I should mention this discrepancy, since otherwise the replacement of `view.viewMatrix` with `view.transform.inverse.matrix` doesn't make sense r? @jdm <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/23159) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
bors-servo
pushed a commit
to servo/servo
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2019
Update XR code to use rigid transforms and new pose/transform stuff from the spec This updates our XR code to use euclid's new [RigidTransform3D type](servo/euclid#328), which is more efficent and convenient to work with. It additionally brings us up to speed with the spec: - `XRViewerPose` was made a subclass of `XRPose` (immersive-web/webxr#496) - `XRView.viewMatrix` was removed in favor of `XRRigidTransform.inverse.matrix` (immersive-web/webxr#531) - `XRRigidTransform.inverse` is an attribute (immersive-web/webxr#560) - `XRRigidTransform` now validates positions in its constructor (immersive-web/webxr#568) Furthermore, it adds support for `XRRigidTransform.matrix`. While fixing this I also noticed that our view matrix code was incorrect, we calculated view matrices as `pose.to_column_major_array()`, whereas it *should* be `pose.inverse().to_row_major_array()` (since Euclid uses row vectors, whenever the spec says it wants a column major array we should use `.to_row_major_array()` since all web specs implicitly use column vectors). For 3DOF 674D devices poses are mostly rotations anyway, so the effective transpose behaved _like_ an inversion, but was incorrect. This PR gets rid of `view.viewMatrix` anyway, however I felt like I should mention this discrepancy, since otherwise the replacement of `view.viewMatrix` with `view.transform.inverse.matrix` doesn't make sense r? @jdm <!-- Reviewable:start --> --- This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="34" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/23159) <!-- Reviewable:end -->
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.