RE: [cgmo-webcgm] Review Chapter 2

[Dieter Weidenbruck <dieter@itedo.com>]

Hi Lofton,

 

see inline

-----Original Message-----
From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 2:17 AM
To: dieter@itedo.com; cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Review Chapter 2

At 05:53 PM 6/2/2005 +0200, =?us-ascii?Q?Dieter__Weidenbruck?= wrote:

here are my comments regarding chapter 2 (and typos in 1)

Thanks for your careful reading.  All comments were implemented as specified, except:

The colour model sRGB-alpha is deprecated and may be removed in a future version of WebCGM.
[DW] This (or a similar) sentence has been used in other places as well, so we will have to do a search for sRGB once this has been decided upon. 

It was my impression that this is not finally confirmed yet, and Benoit has an action item to discuss his recommendation with Chris Lilley (who is the source of the requirement and a color guru.)  Therefore I included the recommended sentence with issue flagging.

The layer is defined as
<!ELEMENT layer (grobject | para | grnode | gdata)+        >
also shown in this picture (without the opt).

Dave, can you regenerate the picture?  (The EBNF has been fixed everywhere.)

2.6  1.)
Is there a normative section describing this use case?

(The wording at #1 is:  "can be used as a scaled down XML representation of a WebCGM illustration by enumerating the Application Structures IDs, types and attributes.")

Those are exactly the words preceding example 4.1 in the normative XCF chapter.

Comments, Benoit or anyone?
[DW] We have been discussing this, however, if we really  want to use the XCF this way we should probably

flag the file accordingly to distinguish it from "normal" XCFs. We need to think about a way then to add the "name" attribute to

such a list file. Right now we are not able to enumerate all APS IDs, types, and attributes: the name(s) would be missing.

To be checked:
Case sensitivity linkuri

-       spelling throughout the spec

check case sensitivity on XML and on CGM side

I will do a careful spell check later.  I'm not sure I understand the other bits.  I searched ch.2 for linkuri and all occurrences are correct.  What do you mean by "check case sensitivity on XML and on CGM side"?  (And who should do that check?)
[DW] Sorry, that was more meant as a reminder for myself. What I think is needed is a thorough check where we have case sensitivity and where not, i.e. expressions that show up on the XML side should use the same case sensitivity as is required inside the CGM.

[DW] This is especially important for attribute names, APS IDs, and some APS attribute values.

 

Regards,

Dieter

 

Thanks,
-Lofton.