Re: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE: should DOM style properties be available in XCF?

[Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>]

I say 'we do it' or 'we don't do it', but it's not worth our time to
come up with a half way solution. Example: we either support:

<grobject apsid="obj1" stroke-weight="200%"  />

or we don't.
 
But I (personally) don't want to spend time on this specification
enplaning how they can be simulated with this:

<grobject apsid="obj1" asd:stroke-weight="200%"  />

The S1000D should be able to figure that one out on their own.

If other vendors are interested in supporting style properties in the
XCF, they should say so.

Regards,

-- 
 Benoit   mailto:benoit@itedo.com


Wednesday, May 25, 2005, 1:47:00 PM, Lofton wrote:

LH> Some of us (SC) were pondering some questions about scope of
LH> the 2.0 work, schedule and S1000D time constraints, etc.  By
LH> mistake, it actually turned into a technical discussion thread
LH> which should have played out on the TC list.  I volunteered to
LH> summarize it to put the issue on the TC list for discussion.  Here
LH> it is.

LH> Dieter's comment that started the discussion:
LH> I had people here at the S1000D conference asking for
LH> modifying style properties using an XCF.  Use case:  A CGM contains
LH> two different configurations of a device.  The user should only
LH> work with one configuration.  Instead of making one
LH> configuration invisible, it should go to 20% display and stay
LH> visible as a reference image.  Sounds like a reasonable request to
LH> me.

LH> Implementation:

LH> - load the CGM using the style described by the CGM elements

LH> - apply an XCF and treat style property changes like DOMcalls

LH> Ideally one would load the XCF right with the CGM, but I can
LH> alsoenvision use cases where you first load the CGM, and then
LH> apply the XCFat a later point in time.

LH> To be clear, we're talking about the same set of style
LH> properties asdefined in WebCGM 2.0 DOM, for setStyleProperty.  An
LH> XCF styleproperty example would look like, 

LH> <grobject apsid="obj1" stroke-weight="200%"  />

LH> The principal concern that was expressed was about
LH> schedule: defining and putting it into the 2.0 spec, and more
LH> significantlyprobably -- implementing it in time.  Note that part
LH> of the definingmust be done anyway, for the DOM part.  I.e., the
LH> technical detailsof stroke-weight, text-font, etc would be
LH> identical for XCF asDOM.

LH> A possible alternative was mentioned, if schedule looked too
LH> tight: CGMO helps ASD to define it as a namespace extension to the
LH> 2.0 XCF, forthe S1000D-2006 timeframe.  E.g.

LH> <grobject apsid="obj1" asd:stroke-weight="200%"  />

LH> After sorting out some confusion, we all agreed what this
LH> wouldmean.  Viewers would NOT be expected to handle the
LH> NS-extensionstyle property.  I.e., execution of loadAndApply would
LH> not result ininterpretation of the NS-extension style property. 
LH> Rather, it wouldbe the responsibility of the application (e.g.,
LH> JavaScript app.) to useDOM to query/retrieve the NS extension, and
LH> then call the DOMsetStyleProperty method.  CGMO could help out by
LH> writing a standardJS module that could be used by any ASD/XCF
LH> application.

LH> If the functionality is indeed a requirement, then this is
LH> not an optimallong-term solution, but only a potential stopgap for
LH> scheduleexpediency.  There may be other technical
LH> issues/objections about itas well.