The Java Community Process(SM) Program - JSRs: Java Specification Requests

Use of JCP site is subject to the JCP Terms of Use and the Oracle Privacy Policy

JSR #239
Java^TM Binding for the OpenGL^® ES API
JSR Review Ballot
Ballot duration: 2004-02-17 to: 2004-03-01

These are the final results of the JSR Review Ballot for JSR #239. The Executive Committee for ME has approved this ballot.

Votes

Ericsson AB

IBM

Insignia Solutions

Intel Corp.

Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.

Motorola

Nokia Corporation

Philips Electronics UK Ltd

Research In Motion, LTD (RIM)

Siemens AG

Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB

Sony International (Europe) GmbH

Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Symbian Ltd

Texas Instruments Inc.

Vodafone Group Services Limited

Icon Legend
Yes
No
Abstain
Not voted

View Vote Log

On 2004-03-01 Ericsson AB voted Yes with the following comment:
Since Java bindings for OpenGL on the PC have been initiated, it is natural to see this happen also in the J2ME environment. There is a large base of code, examples and knowledge of OpenGL (and thus OpenGL ES) in the 3D graphics community which can be utilized if these bindings are defined. Ericsson Mobile Platforms is supportive of Open GL ES functionality in the J2ME space. 

However, we fear that this may lead to fragmentation of the space (if not carefully aligned) when the functionalities offered through this JSR may not be a whole lot different than those offered by JSR-184 (Mobile 3D Graphics).  Even though JSR 184 mainly provides a high level API, it also offers a low level API that will be directly competing with JSR 239. We thus see a risk that it may be confusing for developers to choose between JSR-184 and JSR-239. We welcome a discussion on how this fragmentation issue can be solved. One of the option may be to provide a clear migration path from JSR-184 to JSR-239. 

The current request proposes two profiles of the API; one that runs on CLDC 1.0 and contains Common Lite, and another one that runs on CLDC 1.1 and contains Common. We see a risk that this further aggravates fragmentation, and we would therefore like to remove the CLDC 1.0 / Common Light profile from the proposal. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-27 Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB voted Yes with the following comment:
We vote in favour of the JSR on technical merits. When it comes to licensing terms we also see that there is a need to have licensing terms that is simple, predictable and affordable for a wide range of implementors
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-27 Research In Motion, LTD (RIM) voted Yes with the following comment:
We don't feel the Common-Lite profile with fixed-point apis is necessary, CLDC 1.1 should be the target configuration given OpenGL will be associated with more powerful ME devices.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-27 Texas Instruments Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-27 IBM voted Yes with the following comment:
We support this JSR and encourage a close working relationship with JSR-231.  We would also encourage the EG to only support floating point and thus the OpenGL ES Common profile and not the Common-Lite profile.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-27 Intel Corp. voted Yes with the following comment:
We strongly believe that this JSR should support floating point API's, not fixed point - so no Common-Lite profile support.

We share the concerns of other EC members that licensing terms be simple, predictable and affordable for a wide range of implementors.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-28 Symbian Ltd voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-29 Philips Electronics UK Ltd voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-29 Sony International (Europe) GmbH voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-29 Motorola voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-03-01 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-03-01 Siemens AG voted Abstain with the following comment:
We welcome the change of the proposal to state that JSR 239 covers the same functionality as JSR 184. Siemens feels uncomfortable having two different JSR with overlapping functionality.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-17 Sun Microsystems, Inc. voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-18 Insignia Solutions voted Yes with no comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2004-02-26 Nokia Corporation voted Yes with the following comment:
We appreciate Sun's correction of the statement with regard to JSR-184 on this new JSR proposal. Nokia's vote is based on the technical merits of this JSR and not on the licensing terms.  Still, Nokia wants to express its support for license models that foster an open environment for and wide acceptance and adoption of Java specifications. 
Nokia believes that competition in implementation of Java technologies is best served through license models that are simple, predictable and affordable for a wide range of implementors. 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------