EIP ERC App Keys: application specific wallet accounts

There is no standardised prefix for coins other than Bitcoin besides BIP44 - which is organised around UTXO coins and one specific use-case. Given the Bitcoin community’s resistance to expending effort on helping other projects with standardisation, it’s unlikely we’ll ever have one - so the unmerged proposal from luke-jr is the closest we’re likely to come.

It’s definitely in contravention of BIP44 to use m/44'/60'/ as a prefix and not use the remaining fields as specified.

I’m not sure why you think this is a restriction, or unacceptable. Can you clarify?

When there’s multiple independent teams trying to use a namespace without collisions, we need a way to divide it up to ensure that collisions don’t happen. Using this proposal is one way to do that, and allows us to define any subtree we want without any chance of overlap.