This isn't JS to Vulkan. You are talking about the Obsidian proposal [1] that was not accepted or implemented. WebGPU is higher level. High enough to hide the

This isn't JS to Vulkan. You are talking about the Obsidian proposal [1] that was not accepted or implemented. WebGPU is higher level. High enough to hide the most nasty aspects of Vulkan, yet low enough to still extract the performance benefits of a proper API. Implementing validation and proper input sanitation is undoubtedly a big challenge. Each browser engine(!) vendor is going to be tackling that separately. We are ready to learn on Vulkan mistakes and drive this story of validation and CTS to be better. One of the things that make a difference in comparison to Vulkan is that validation is not an afterthought, not a side developer assistance tooling. Validation is in the core of WebGPU, it's mandatory and always enabled, so chances are it will be more polished. [1] https://github.com/kvark/WebGLNext-Proposals/blob/obsidian/Obsidian-Mozilla/README.md https://github.com/kvark/WebGLNext-Proposals/blob/obsidian/O...