[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Public WebGL] Issues with Extension Registry



I think "Experimental" would be better than "Draft." The latter to me means a paper proposal. The former conveys that there are implementations. Another possibility, maybe better, is "Prototype."

Having the numerical listing in reverse order feels a bit strange but I expect I can get used to it.

Some appropriate borders may help to both separate the Official and Prototype extensions and tie together the "By Number" and "By Name" lists.

Regarding the other thread on extension naming...

I'm not going to raise any further objections to the proposed solution.

It would be nice if we could approve WEBGL_lose_context and release it together with 1.0.1 so the the vendor decorated names can be dispensed with.

Finally, I'd like to point out that automatic browser updates don not make everything as rosy as Chris painted. Users can still delay or decline updates and many will wait until extensions they depend on have been updated to be compatible. Therefore vendor-specific prefixes are not a complete solution for authors. Probably sufficient but not complete.

Regards

-Mark


On 29/11/2011 10:19, Kenneth Russell wrote:
Sorry for the delay, but these changes have been implemented:

http://www.khronos.org/registry/webgl/extensions/

Thoughts?