> so far my observation is that those who wish to argue with him about this point seem to want to generalize it into a ball of mystery, as they are more expert

> so far my observation is that those who wish to argue with him about this point seem to want to generalize it into a ball of mystery, as they are more expert and know the territory better. It's the opposite, this stuff is already hard, there's no need to make it more complicated by introducing a distinction that's misleading. > WebGL is not a 3D library, because a 3D library would have some sort of blackbox'ed object loader, maybe a bit of physics/collision-detection too, and so on .. That's a pretty arbitrary cutoff, but all the same: you're describing a 3d engine, not a library. Besides why would you want all that in one library? I'd rather have my mesh loading and my physics be separate libraries so I can have more choices and keep my includes small.