Thats another one, why do flapless approaches need to be flatter or go out further than normal approaches? If you have such a surfeit of energy why not just apply less power and maintain the glide path.
In a light aircraft at least flapless landings don't require a flatter approach path and the approach profile is so similar to a normal landing that I don't think it's worth calling. A 10kt or so increase in threshold speed is the only difference usually.
Also if you say on the radio: 'Flapless approach' (which I have heard before) it doesn't really help other pilots much....if you are going to extend the downwind...the say so, it's much more meaningful than saying 'flapless approach'.
I'd always call a glide approach...I think the approach profile is different enough to warrant it.