Incidentally, if anyone from google is listening:
Just a suggestion, but IMHO it would make sense to use a mixed
strategy of o3d plugin AND webgl. In this way if the user can be
bothered to install the plugin they can benefit from better
performance up until such time as the browsers are fully supporting
webgl. And in any browser that doesn't not support webgl the user can
be prompted to install the plugin. And any browser that does support
webgl, the page can run in the browser without the plugin initially
but for next 12 months or so offer the user a choice to go either with
the plugin or run direct in the browser...
Then we could use pretty much the same project code to target either
o3d plugin OR o3d javascript library... which would be a really good
reason for using the o3d javascript library in the first place, rather
than just going for regular WebGL.