This does seem a bit silly. Anyone else think there is headless chicken syndrom going on with Microsoft's IP claims going on?
[opinion]
I think, and have thought since reading the board meeting notes where the IP claims from Microsoft were mentioned and thinking back to nVidia's licensing for their vertex shader extension, that the board would feel pressure to adopt nVidia's direction for shading extensions/HLSL to try and shield itself from Microsoft's claims. I expected to see nVidia adopted as a permanent ARB member at about the same time as an official announcement that OpenGL 1.4 would use the NV_ shader extensions if this pressure succeeded. Watching the announcement of OpenGL 1.4 and this poll, I feel in the context of this expectation that the board is thrown into confusion about this issue, and as committees tend to do is making unorganized noises that only make sense in the context of the board being unable to resolve the issue (i.e., doing something to appease a "faction" instead of coming to a consensus and acting in a well considered manner).[/opinion]
Now, I think the above is possible, and I think a fair reading of the state of OpenGL and the ARB, but it is so filled with speculation that I felt I had to highlight that and emphasize that I recognize that going round and round about it would be pointless, and instead post it to be deconstructed and refuted with reasons why the observed behavior and comments of the ARB, or perhaps other info I'm not aware of, support something else. So have at it.
