[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re[2]: [cgmo-webcgm] Issue: linkuri (chap 3 & chap 5) different
Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 8:40:12 PM, Lofton wrote: LH> At 04:28 PM 4/26/2005 -0400, Benoit Bezaire wrote: LH> Hi cgmo-webcgm, LH> The Airbus people made me realize that Chapter 3 and 5contradict LH> themselves regarding linkuri (or at least that a user can easilyget LH> confused). LH> IMO, potential confusion is the problem, but I don't see an actual LH> contradiction. I think it depends if you are in the user's context or the implementer's context. LH> Section 3.2.2.3 Linkuri saysthat there are optional parts. LH> It says:"Parameters. The data record is a SDR of one member, LH> containingthree strings (type SF, String Fixed). The first string LH> is the link destination, a URI, the second string (possibly null) LH> isa Link Title parameter, and the third string is (possibly null) LH> the Behavior parameter. Note that a null string is a zero-length LH> string, and is not the same as an omitted parameter." LH> I have always thought this to mean that all three parts must LH> be present, even if part 2 and/or part 3 are empty strings. Do LH> you read it otherwise? Again, if a script writer ends up reading this definition instead of the one in chapter 5... he may get confused. It's not that clear how you map the above wording to: obj.setAppStructureAttr( "linkuri", ??what goes here?? ); LH> Section 5.5 says that there are no optional parts. LH> Okay, but can part 2 and/or part 3 be an empty string? Yes. Should this be clarified? LH> This would allow, for example, a delimited string of: LH> "'http://www.example.org/blah.cgm' '' ''" LH> or LH> "'http://www.example.org/blah.cgm' 'Link to blah' ''" LH> or LH> "'http://www.example.org/blah.cgm' '' '_replace'" Yes. LH> So all 3 parts are included, although some may consist of LH> empty string. Does that seem like it creates a potential LH> problem? (I don't see it.) I don't think so. LH> If not, then I think this can be consistent with 3.2.2.3, if we LH> clarify it as such. LH> It seems like the distinction between a DOM encoding of a linkuri LH> and the actual binary encoding isn't strong enough. We also havethe LH> table in section 5.7.6 that links back to 3.2.2.3 which may addto LH> the confusion. LH> Suggestions on how to clarify this? LH> We may want table 5.7.6 link to section 5.5 and then havesection LH> 5.5 link to 3.2.2.3 (i.e. force people to read section5.5). LH> That would probably help. We should clearly distinguish that LH> the delimited-string DOM encoding in section 5.5 and 5.7.6) is LH> distinct from the SDR encoding of the WebCGM instance itself (SDR, LH> as described in eachof 3.2.2.1 thru 3.2.2.10). Yes. LH> Btw, in 5.7.6 the example for linkuri is: LH> "http://w3.org" "W3C" "_blank" LH> Shouldn't it be: LH> '"http://w3.org" "W3C" "_blank"' LH> I.e., enclosed in APOSTROPHEs? Yes and no. Apostrophes are not in section 5.5 In which context are you speaking of, DOM Strings or SDR encoding? If I want to set the visibility on a object to 'off', I use: obj.setAppStructureAttr( "visibility", "off" ); But the quote are required to tell the ECMAScript engine that this is a string; the actual string value is: \o \f \f \0 If I do a get, I get back: \o \f \f \0, not \" \o \f \f \" \0 Yes, the table in insconsistent, but it's not clear if it is showing a set string or a get string. LH> A delimited string is a string of wsp-separated substrings, LH> according to the grammar of 5.5. (Same comment for 'name'.) Yes, but it doesn't mean that '"http://w3.org" "W3C" "_blank"' is the actual value (the \' are not present in the actual value). -- Benoit mailto:benoit@itedo.com LH> Regards. LH> -Lofton.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]