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

Re: [Public WebGL] WEBKIT_ extensions

On Nov 15, 2011, at 6:11 PM, Mark Callow wrote:

> On 16/11/2011 04:15, Chris Marrin wrote:
>> Additionally I don't think we should ever use prefixes like EXT (as in WEBGL_EXT_lose_context) for unratified extensions. EXT, ARB, OES, etc. should only ever be used to mimic the names of the corresponding Khronos extension.
> I don't understand your objection to using EXT as a "prefix". EXT extensions are not Khonos ratified. It seems to me just as legitimate to use WEBGL_EXT for a WEBGL specific extension as for the WEBGL version of an existing EXT extension found in the Khronos registry. There should be no additional confusion caused. Both are unratified extensions whose spec's cannot be relied on as final.

I have two issues with EXT. First, I don't think we should use it at all for WebGL extensions because of its history of use in OpenGL. I think it was just be too confusing. Second, a non-vendor specific prefix isn't used in web standards. They're always vendor specific and I think we should follow that convention.

>> 4) The prefix should be prepended and never replace any part of the extension. So it should be WEBKIT_WEBGL_lose_context and not WEBKIT_lost_context.
> In the Khronos extension naming principles the vendor / ext / working group "prefix" actually comes second in the extension string that an application searches for or passes to enable. The string starts with the API prefix. So the extension string in the above instance would be WEBGL_WEBKIT_lose_context and the extension name would be WEBKIT_lose_context.

But I think we're following web conventions here, which would put the vendor prefix first.


You are currently subscribed to public_webgl@khronos.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to majordomo@khronos.org with
the following command in the body of your email:
unsubscribe public_webgl