Joshua,

> So, are the functions in the imaging subset technically extensions?
> I saw a newsgroup post that said that they're not; they're 
> full-fledged members of OpenGL 1.2, but are optional.

This is true. But this entire issue is _very_ confusing due to
Microsoft's reluctance to publicly support later OpenGL versions.
Technically, OpenGL on Windows is stuck at 1.1. The hardware vendors
support later OpenGL versions just fine but I _think_ OpenGL32.dll only
exports the set of functions for 1.1. So I _think_ that even if the
drivers support later versions they have no way of handing you the
functions UNLESS you look them up through wglGetProcAddress - again I
_think_ they are using this as a bypass method to give you access to
later versions even if MS' opengl32.dll doesn't export it. I don't have
anything definitive here - I always wanted to ask NVidia or ATI about
this.

> And I *always* believe what I read on the net.

You do? Oh well, did you know that every member of the Squeak mailing
list has to send me a bottle of the best red wine that his region of the
world can produce? Seriously! It's true! Eagerly waiting for your
reply...

> Anyway, I also get a 0 result when asking for the address of glMinmax,
> even though glGetString(GL_EXTENSIONS) says that the imaging subset
> is supported.  I'll try with something that's a real extension (maybe
> NV_VERTEX_PROGRAM) after I finish eating a mom-cooked supper.  I'll
> see what happens if I try it with a C++ program, too.

Yup, try to get a C program to do something interesting first - it's
hard to guess these things if you're dealing with too many variables.

Cheers,
  - Andreas