RE: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE: does the 'highlight' object behavior revert to full-picture view?

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 10:30 AM 6/14/2005 +0200, =?us-ascii?Q?Dieter__Weidenbruck?= wrote:
>[...]
> > Did you indeed mean "implementor"?  To me it seems like an issue for
> > users/content creators.  What content creator would use such a
> > non-navigating "full" keyword in a hyperlink fragment, without any way to
> > know how the user may have moved the view with the viewer
> > controls?  If the
> > content creators and other users cannot trust the result, who
> > would use "full"?
>Sorry, I meant the implementor of an IETM, hence a content creator.
>There are many use cases for this, e.g. in scenarios where the viewer is set
>to "fixed" in the OBJECT tag, but also in others.
>I think a strict separation of the behaviors highlight, move, zoom, full is
>very useful to clarify the actual behavior.
>
>Have a look at the following sequence:

Okay, then you are assuming (correct?) that the object element had a param 
sub-element of type 'fixed' with valueYES, to prevent the sort of user 
interaction (which I embed in your example below) that would make it useless...

>abc.cgm#id(myView,zoom)

(User interaction with IsoView controls:  zoom in 16x on some little detail 
far outside of the 'myView' rectangle.)

>abc.cgm#name(myFirstObj,highlight)
>abc.cgm#name(mySecondObj,highlight)
>abc.cgm#id(myThirdObj,highlight)

I understand your use case now.

Question.  Is it clear that FIXED applies only to user manipulation of 
viewer controls, and not also to view manipulation via objBehavior keywords 
in URL fragment?  (IMO, in the present wording, that is not completely 
obvious and unambiguous, and should be made so if that's what we intend.)

-Lofton.