Add ToT webgl conformance tests: part 1

CONFORMANCE_RULES.txt

Index: CONFORMANCE_RULES.txt
===================================================================
--- CONFORMANCE_RULES.txt	(revision 230753)
+++ CONFORMANCE_RULES.txt	(working copy)
@@ -9,6 +9,43 @@
 to clarify to potential implementers the rules the Khronos Group uses
 to judge whether a particular WebGL implementation is conformant.
 
+There are two primary reasons to submit conformance results:
+
+  A) A web browser implementer desires to certify their WebGL
+     implementation as conformant.
+
+  B) A GPU manufacturer delivering an embedded system including web
+     browser with WebGL support desires to certify their WebGL
+     implementation as conformant.
+
+Each of these situations carries different constraints, so the
+conformance rules are phrased differently for each. Typically, a web
+browser implementer aims to certify that the WebGL "layer" is correct.
+A GPU vendor typically aims to certify that a given device is
+physically capable of passing the tests.
+
+A newly-developed WebGL implementation should not support the "webgl"
+HTML Canvas context type by default in a shipping version of the
+product until reaching conformance. It is acceptable to give end users
+an option to turn on WebGL support in a non-conformant implementation
+as long as the documentation for that option clearly indicates that
+the implementation is not yet conformant and may have compatibility
+issues. It is suggested that the Canvas context type
+"experimental-webgl" may be supported by default in such
+implementations.
+
+A WebGL implementation might reach conformance, but a subsequent
+graphics driver release on a particular OS might introduce a
+regression causing failures of one or more of the WebGL conformance
+tests. In this situation it is not required to revoke support for the
+"webgl" HTML Canvas context type. The WebGL implementer should work
+with the GPU vendor to ensure the driver regression is fixed. A
+situation like this would, however, prevent the WebGL implementer from
+conforming to a subsequent version of the test suite.
+
+(A) Conformance Rules for a Web Browser Implementer
+===================================================
+
 1. Conformance on a particular operating system
 
 On a given OS, a WebGL implementation will be considered to conform to
@@ -23,33 +60,52 @@
 version of the conformance suite if it passes rule (1) on all of the
 OSs on which the WebGL implementation is intended to be supported.
 
+3. Conformance as the web browser is upgraded
+
+WebGL conformance results submitted for an earlier version of the
+browser carry forward to later versions of the browser, unless the
+WebGL implementation changes substantially enough that it is expected
+that conformance may have been affected. In that case, the browser
+implementer should submit new conformance results.
+
+4. Conformance as the operating system is upgraded
+
+If a new version is released of one of the OSs on which a WebGL
+implementation is intended to run, then WebGL conformance results
+submitted for earlier versions of that OS carry forward. Future
+conformance results must be submitted against the new version of the
+OS. If it is anticipated that the older OS version will be supported
+for some time, then future conformance results must be submitted
+separately for both the old and new versions of the OS.
+
+(B) Conformance Rules for a GPU Vendor
+======================================
+
+A GPU vendor submitting conformance results for a WebGL implementation
+typically does so because the device containing the GPU includes a
+built-in web browser. In this case the following rules apply:
+
+1. Conformance results must be submitted for each GPU and operating
+system combination to be certified. It is not required to submit
+results for different devices containing the same GPU and running the
+same operating system.
+
+2. Conformance results may be submitted up to three months in advance
+of the product reaching initial shipment.
+
+3. Conformance results carry forward for a given GPU as the operating
+system and graphics driver are upgraded, unless there is an
+expectation that conformance may have been affected. In that case, the
+GPU vendor should submit new conformance results.
+
 Discussion
 ==========
 
-A WebGL implementation might reach conformance on a particular OS, but
-a subsequent graphics driver release on that OS might introduce a
-regression causing failures of one or more of the WebGL conformance
-tests. In this situation it is not required that the browser revoke
-support for the "webgl" HTML Canvas context type. The browser vendor
-should work with the GPU vendor to ensure the driver regression is
-fixed. A situation like this would, however, prevent the WebGL
-implementer from conforming to a subsequent version of the test suite.
-
 A WebGL implementation intended to ship on three OSs may reach
 conformance on two of them, but due to graphics driver bugs, may be
 unable to reach conformance on the third. In this situation the
 implementation is not yet considered to be conformant.
 
-A web browser author developing a new WebGL implementation should not
-support the "webgl" HTML Canvas context type by default in a shipping
-version of the product until reaching conformance. It is acceptable to
-give end users an option to turn on WebGL support in a non-conformant
-implementation as long as the documentation for that option clearly
-indicates that the implementation is not yet conformant and may have
-compatibility issues. It is suggested that the Canvas context type
-"experimental-webgl" may be supported by default in such
-implementations.
-
 An existing WebGL implementation which conformed to an earlier version
 of the test suite is not required to remove support for the "webgl"
 HTML Canvas context type while in the process of conforming to a later
@@ -59,6 +115,11 @@
 conformance, for example number or percentage of passing or failing
 tests, or names of passing or failing tests.
 
+A GPU vendor might submit conformance results in order to use the
+WebGL logo in a marketing campaign. In this situation, results may be
+submitted in advance of the product becoming available through sales
+channels, per the rules above.
+
 The WebGL API has strict security requirements. Even one failing test
 may indicate a serious security issue in the WebGL implementation. For
 this reason, no exceptions for failing conformance tests will be