1 Welcome, opening and meeting logistics

Chris Bieneman, chair of TC57, began the teleconference and welcomed attendees. Attendees were reminded of the committee’s code of conduct, Ecma’s IPR policy, and TC57’s royalty-free patent policy extension. All attendees were informed that the meeting was recorded and transcribed by Zoom for the purpose of note-taking, and directed to review the video recording and legal disclaimer if they were not familiar.

2 Approval of the minutes of the virtual meeting of 09 June 2026 & 23 June 2026

In addition to publication to the Ecma file server and distribution to Ecma members, the minutes are published as a pull request on GitHub. The committee confirmed they’d reviewed the PRs and the chair merged them.

3 Review of the agenda

The meeting’s agenda pull request was proposed and approved at the start of the meeting.

• Roadmap View
• Chair Elections
• New Proposals:
  • New Proposal - Named casts
  • New Proposal - groupshared arguments
  • New Proposal - const non-static member functions
  • New Proposal - non-member operator overloading
• Normative language changes (Checking for consensus only)
  • Resources.TypedBuffer
  • Revised phrasing on code blocks
• For 2026-07-21
  • Normative Change [Lex.Identifier]
  • Normative Change [Lex.Keywords]
  • Normative Change [Lex.Operators]
  • New Proposals:
    • New Proposal - Ternary operator behavior
    • New Proposal - User-defined conversions
  • Stage Advancements
    • 0002 - Conforming Literals to Completed
    • 0008 - Numeric Constants to Refinement
    • 0009 - hlsl namespace to Refinement
    • 0012 - Loop Unroll Factor to Refinement
• Draft Status
  • Monthly report
• Committee Policy Questions from @pow2clk
  • AI Policy Clarifications
  • Review Policy
  • What is our approach to breaking changes?
  • How can we encourage multiple perspectives on HLSL proposals?
  • How do we decide what gets included in the HLSL spec at this point?
• How does the committee want to handle removals? - 202x Removals
  • We have a growing list of removals, this is unlikely to be complete for a while. I’d like to avoid introducing specification language for things we want to remove, so how do we decide on this and ratify it?

4 Editors’ report

The chair has prepared a website featuring a monthly report of progress on the HLSL specification. The committee are encouraged to disseminate, and also to have an eye toward the progress bar as there is much to do and the current pace threatens the relevance of the final standard.

5 New proposals

5.1 New Proposal - Named casts

No objections, this new proposal is approved as “under consideration”.

5.2 New Proposal - groupshared arguments

No objections, this new proposal is approved as “under consideration”.

5.3 New Proposal - const non-static member functions

No objections, this new proposal is approved as “under consideration”.

5.4 New Proposal - non-member operator overloading

No objections, this new proposal is approved as “under consideration”.

6 Discussions

6.1 Normative language consensus: Resources.TypedBuffer hlsl-tc57/tc57#65 & revised phrasing on code blocks 4bbc00ee

This is not a proposal, but rather documentation of current behaviour seeking consensus to add to the relevant normative text to the specification.

Gregory Roth from Nvidia expressed dissent due to the rigidity of the language and concerns over missing details describing the current behaviour. The committee will discuss between meetings and revisit in the future.

6.2 AI policy review

TC57 aligns its AI policy with ISO & IEC, in that no text sourced from Generative AI is to be accepted as contributions to any standard or technical report published by the committee. ISO & IEC have recently revised their policy to allow for AI contributions from tools provided explicitly by ISO & IEC. The wording of this policy update implies specifically tools for minuting and other meta documentation and is not expected to impact standards or technical reports due to IP concerns. TC57 will continue to align with ISO & IEC’s AI policy at this time.

The Khronos Group has recently adopted a more permissive AI policy. TC57 had expected potential proposals or even specification text from the Vulkan WG within the Khronos Group. This policy change will require an increased effort on the part of TC57 to integrate any features from the Vulkan WG, though the committee will continue to welcome their participation.

6.3 Committee policy and process

6.3.1 Reviews

The committee discussed what to expect as an author, a reviewer, or a commenter when it comes to reviewing open proposals and pull requests. Some guidance for delegates:

• Provide specific and actionable feedback
• Review early and often so that ideally threads can be resolved before the fortnightly meeting
• Triage what’s in flight to make sure the most important content to a given member or delegate is reviewed even if the overall volume is more than any one individual can make time for
• When reviewing a proposal, be mindful of the stage it is seeking and either finely tune feedback to that stage’s concerns, or clearly denote that a given comment will not need to be resolved at its current stage.

The chair is hopeful that merging hlsl-tc57/tc57#65 will support streamlining both authoring and reviewing thanks to the consistency of language and structure.

In the interest of ensuring that all proposals have been reviewed by at least one delegate other than the author, the committee will begin assigning reviews to individual delegates for each proposal. This process will be refined and documented as it is developed.

6.3.2 Encouraging more perspectives

In addition to the 3-4 Ecma members currently participating in TC57, Gregory Roth (Nvidia) posed the question—how does the committee encourage more perspectives? Is it on the committee to be recruiting?

Secretary’s note: yes, always be recruiting!

The delegates discussed engaging with other manufacturers, as well as consumers of implementations of the standard—game devs themselves. They can provide a perspective that the manufacturers lack.

6.3.3 Breaking changes

Gregory Roth seeks to develop a documented policy or process for breaking changes. In particular, breaking changes which could potentially silently change behaviour in a way that developers may not expect. This is in addition to the existing policy that breaking changes shall be introduced via the proposal process.

Gregory suggested finding ways to provide migration guidance for implementations and users. This may fall out of scope of the standard itself, but could be a potential topic for an informal community call.

7 Any other business

The committee will need to plan chair elections in the next 6 months. The chair suggests delegates begin considering now if they will wish to run. Chris also volunteered to continue on as chair.

8 Next meetings

The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 21 July. Meetings are held via Zoom call every other week at 09:00 PDT (11:00 CDT, 18:00 CEST). Meeting times during seasonal time changes will be set using US Pacific (America/Los_Angeles) time.

8.1 Past and Future Agendas

Agendas are viewable in GitHub and remain available in perpetuity.

9 Conclusion

The Chair wrapped up the meeting and the call concluded.