Re: [cgmo-webcgm] WebCGM version in test cases

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 06:16 PM 5/16/2005 -0400, Benoit Bezaire wrote:
>They should say ProfileEd:2.0.

I agree that it should be 2.0.

>'grnode', the new object-to-object links are all version 2 features.
>I don't think the ProfileEd can remain 1.0.

My 'viewcontext' CGM test file is a valid 1.0 file, because to test the DOM 
handling of 'viewcontext', the CGM doesn't need and doesn't contain any 
2.0-specific metafile content.  It validates for WebCGM 1.0 according to 
MetaCheck.  Nevertheless, I agree that it ought to have 2.0 in the Metafile 
Description, as it's part of the 2.0 test suite.

-Lofton.