re[4]: [cgmo-webcgm] Visibilty & Interactivity defaults

[Don Larson <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>]

Benoit,

  > Hi Don,

  > From section 3.2.2.9 Visibility and 3.2.2.10 Interactivity, both
  > attributes seem to have an Initial value of: on.

  > So the above, for a WebCGM renderer should be sufficient.

That's is clear.

  > For a DOM implementation, getAppStructureAttr() says:
  > returns [...] the Application Structure attribute value as a string,
  > or the empty string if that attribute does not have an explicitly set
  > value [...]

So if the CGM does an APS ATTRIBUTE of type "visibility" then
a getAppStructureAttr("visibility") on that APS would return 
empty string, correct? 

  > If the tests don't match the specification, then we need to figure out
  > which one is wrong and fix it.

The AppStructure-interactivity test is the one giving me trouble. 
Here is the confusing html code:

      var gr = cgmPic.getAppStructureById("plane");
      var gr2 = cgmPic.getAppStructureById("plane_1"); 
      var i = gr.getAppStructureAttr("interactivity");
      var i2 = gr.getAppStructureAttr("interactivity"); // TBD: non-interactive
      if ( i == "on" && i2 == "on" )
         result.firstChild.nodeValue = "Passed!";
      else
         throw "wrong interactivity value";

Since the CGM does not contain an APS ATTRUBUTE of type "interactivity"
then I would expect the getAppStructureAttr("interactivity") to return an
empty string. But as you can see from the above code it is expecting "on".

Is this test incorrect?

Don.

  > -- 
  > Regards,
  >  Benoit   mailto:benoit@itedo.com

  > This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected
  > by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware
  > that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or
  > any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
  > error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and
  > delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation. 


  > Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 2:57:29 PM, you wrote:

  > > Benoit,

  > >   > Just a note for now.
  > >   > We can't based an implementation on a test suite. It needs to be based
  > >   > on an interpretation of the specification. If the specification does
  > >   > not provide the answer, we need to fix it.

  > > I agree!  But I cannot determine from the Specification what the
  > > defaults for Visibilty & Interactivity are when there no 
  > > APS ATTRIBUTEs defined in the CGM.

  > > Don.


  > >   > -- 
  > >   > Regards,
  > >   >  Benoit   mailto:benoit@itedo.com

  > >   > This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected
  > >   > by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware
  > >   > that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or
  > >   > any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
  > >   > error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and
  > >   > delete this copy from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.


  > >   > Tuesday, May 16, 2006, 2:39:15 PM, you wrote:

  > >   > > All,

  > >   > > What are the defaults for the Visibility and Interactivity
  >  attributes
  > >   > > when they are not present in the CGM?

  > >   > > The AppStructure-interactivity test suggest that all APS have 
  > >   > > an Interactivity attribute even though there is no APS ATTRIBUTE
  > >   > > of type "interactivity" in the CGM as is the case for 
  > >   > > AppStructure-interactivity.cgm

  > >   > > The AppStructure-visibility test suggest that APS do NOT have a
  > >   > > "visibility" attribute when no APS ATTRIBUTE of type "visibility"
  > >   > > is present in the CGM.

  > >   > > Can anyone clarify this for me.

  > >   > > Regards, 
  > >   > > Don.