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

Re: [Public WebGL] WEBKIT_ extensions

On 17/11/11 08:59 PM, James Robinson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr@google.com
<mailto:kbr@google.com>> wrote:

Glenn, to address your question further:

    1. I feel that having multiple browsers implement the same prototype
    extension independently will expose ill-defined areas more quickly,
    and allow the extension and its conformance tests to converge more

    2. Requiring a vendor prefix implies that there will be two nearly
    identical copies of the extension in the registry during its
    prototyping phase. Keeping them in sync will likely be my
    responsibility, and from a selfish perspective, I am opposed to
    having to do this work, which I consider useless.

In the rest of the web platform, part of the point of a vendor prefix is that no central registration or coordination mechanism is necessary. Central registration mechanisms are used to avoid collisions, but since vendors do not use other vendor's prefixes and a single vendor can (hopefully) avoid colliding with other extensions they have defined there's no risk. I don't know why WebGL would be different in this aspect since extensions are defined in terms of strings. If maintaining these is a burden (or even if it is not) then I would suggest not putting them in any sort of registry.

I believe that the burden of maintaining the WebGL registry is worth it insofar as it removes the burden of having multiple vendor-prefixed extensions doing the same thing.


- James


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