On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Kenneth Russell <email@example.com
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.