OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cgmo-webcgm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE closed: what is the root node


I agree.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benoit Bezaire [mailto:benoit@itedo.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 9:17 AM
> To: cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE closed: what is the root node
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
>   There's been discussions on what the root node should be; the Picture
>   or the Metafile. We need a root node for two things: the inheritance
>   model, and the XCF.
> 
>   In this email I'm making a proposal for the WebCGMPicture to be the
>   root node. Here's why:
> 
>   i) To me, the WebCGMMetafile is a simple placeholder for generic
>   information about the file such as VDC extent, metafile version,
>   profile edition, VDC type etc... and this, in my opinion, doesn't
>   need to be a WebCGMNode.
> 
>   ii) I think the inheritance 'root' and the XCF 'root' should be the
>   same; and for this reason, I think WebCGMPicture is a better choice
>   (please see below).
> 
>   iii) Most of our style properties either apply to single APS' or the
>   entire Picture, we've never discussion Metafile-wide style
>   attributes.
> 
>   iv) WebCGM doesn't support multiple pictures per file, but some
>   other profiles do; and if they 'extend' our model, I think it's best
>   if the root is the Picture, here's why:
> 
>     - a DOM implementation supporting multiple pictures would likely
>     iterate between pictures via:
> 
>     var meta = objectId.getWebCGMMetafile();
>     var pic  = meta.firstPicture;
>     while( pic.nextSibling )
>     {
>       ...
>       pic = pic.nextSibling;
>     }
> 
>     - this would allow each picture to be styled differently or in the
>     same way (depending on the use case).
> 
>     - it would also allow to call applyCompanionFile per Picture (just
>     replace the '...' above with the call. Again, a different XCF for
>     each Picture could be applied, or the same to all pictures (the
>     user has the option).
> 
>   v) Having the WebCGMPicture as the root element makes our profile
>   easier to extend for other profiles, and I think that's what we
>   want.
> 
>   vi) I understand that it seems natural to have WebCGMMetafile derive
>   from WebCGMNode (I for one, agree), but I think we're blocking
>   extensibility of the profile if we do that.
> 
>   Unless there are objections, I'm in favor of WebCGMPicture being the
>   root element, okay?
> 
> -- 
>  Benoit                 mailto:benoit@itedo.com
> 
> 


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]