Previews, as seen when this build job started (3d2c735):
WebGPU _{webgpu.idl | Explainer | Correspondence Reference}
WGSL _{grammar.js | wgsl.lalr.txt}

LGTM. The main thing I'd like to see is that proposals include an analysis of the Compat APIs in their investigations. Not sure that's covered by any process, though.

This document says what we require of proposals made to WebGPU, and implicitly in order to show that a proposal is implementable on Compat, it'll have to explain how.

@jimblandy PTAL

I feel like I'm missing something obvious, but:

It seems to me that when we want to add new functionality that Compat mode cannot implement, we have two options:

• Make it conditional on a new feature.

• Make it conditional on "core-features-and-limits".

It sounds like this process proposal is saying that the second option is forbidden. Is that the intent? Can someone remind me why that is necessary?

It sounds like this process proposal is saying that the second option is forbidden. Is that the intent? Can someone remind me why that is necessary?

No, that's not the intent. New core-only but otherwise universal functionality should be added to "core-features-and-limits". I've made that explicit in my latest revision. PTAL

I think it's surprising to call behavior covered by "core-features-and-limits" "optional", but that can wait for another day.

I've edited slightly to clarify that such capabilities would be required parts of optional features (of which "core-features-and-limits" is one since you can implement WebGPU without it).