RE: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION. "direct child" or "descendant"?

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 10:37 AM 8/24/2005 +0200, Dieter  Weidenbrück wrote:
>option 3

That's the way I was leaning.  But I have thought some more since yesterday...

One oddity of Option 3:  clicking gn1 would cause the selection of go1 in 
both the direct-child and descendant examples.  But in the descendant 
example, clicking gn2 would also cause selection of go1, and gn0 would also 
cause selection of go1, and indeed if there were graphics inside go1 but 
outside of gn0, those would also cause selection of go1.  So if we go with 
"descendant", then yes, the content of gn1 is interactive, but it is not 
apparently synonymous with a single interactive object ... it is just a 
piece in a bigger interactive object / context.

Whereas if we go with "direct child", then gn1 looks like an interactive 
object -- clicking within gn1 selects go1, and clicking anywhere outside of 
gn1 does NOT select go1.

So what are we really trying to express in that 3.2.1.5 wording?

-Lofton.


> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 12:45 AM
> > To: cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION. "direct child" or "descendant"?
> >
> >
> > 3.2.1.5.  Grnode
> > ----------
> > "...'grnode' is not interactive; i.e., it does not receive
> > mouse events.
> > The content of a 'grnode' can however be interactive if it
> > [the grnode] is a direct child of a 'grobject', 'para' or 'subpara'".
> >
> > Do we really mean "direct child"?  5.7.10 says, "An
> > application structure of type 'grnode' or 'layer' cannot be a
> > target of a mouse event. Instead, if the mouse pointer was
> > over a 'grnode' when the event occurred; its closest ancestor
> > object of type 'grobject', 'para' or 'subpara' will be
> > designated as the target element."
> >
> > I guess the wording of 3.2.1.5 was chosen that way so that
> > the containing 'grobject' would tightly contain the 'grnode',
> > like this
> >
> > grnobject go1
> >      grnode gn1
> >          [...]
> >      /grnode
> > /grobject
> >
> > and look effectively to be the same object as the containing
> > 'grobject'.  As opposed to gn1 in something like this:
> >
> > grobject go1
> >      grnode gn0
> >          [...]
> >          grnode gn1
> >              [...]
> >          /grnode
> >          grnode gn2
> >              [...]
> >          /grnode
> >      /grnode
> > /grobject
> >
> > Opt.1:  leave it as is.
> > Opt.2:  change to something like, "...can effectively appear
> > to be interactive if it is a direct child of ..."
> > Opt.3:  change to something like, "...can effectively appear
> > to be interactive if it is a descendant of ..."
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Lofton.
> >
> >
> >