[Openicc] XICC specification draft (Xinerama vs. composite).

[Kai-Uwe Behrmann]

Am 27.06.05, 14:52 -0600 schrieb Keith Packard:

> On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 19:42 +0200, Kai-Uwe Behrmann wrote:
> > This implies the color conversion should go in the composite manager, is 
> > this correct? Or do you prefer an other color conversion layer on top of 
> > it?
> 
> The whole composite manager architecture is up for discussion at this
> point; we've got lots of things it needs to do, and right now we can
> only really support a single instance.
> 
> In any case, I suspect color conversion would be implemented as pixel
> shaders in a GL-based compositing manager.  This should provide
> sufficient flexibility and performance for most anyone.

How easy can GPU based image manipulation be achived for single 
applications? Does an application simply need an OpenGL context and 
implement some shader programms , possible using convenient library 
functions like the osX image units?
Are there conflicts with X or disatvantages to been expected?

What is your experience with the amount of work to sucessfully implement 
a differentiated GPU based rendering and manipulation system? Eighter it 
resides apart from X or is somehow integrated for instance in Xgl?

regards
Kai-Uwe Behrmann
                                + development for color management 
                                + imaging / panoramas
                                + email: ku.b at gmx.de
                                + http://www.behrmann.name