RE: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE: does the 'highlight' object behavior revert to full-picture view?

[Dieter Weidenbruck <dieter@itedo.com>]

Lofton,

see inline,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 4:33 PM
> To: dieter@itedo.com; cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] ISSUE: does the 'highlight' object behavior
> revert to full-picture view?
>
>
> At 10:30 AM 6/14/2005 +0200, =?us-ascii?Q?Dieter__Weidenbruck?= wrote:
> >[...]
> > > Did you indeed mean "implementor"?  To me it seems like an issue for
> > > users/content creators.  What content creator would use such a
> > > non-navigating "full" keyword in a hyperlink fragment,
> without any way to
> > > know how the user may have moved the view with the viewer
> > > controls?  If the
> > > content creators and other users cannot trust the result, who
> > > would use "full"?
> >Sorry, I meant the implementor of an IETM, hence a content creator.
> >There are many use cases for this, e.g. in scenarios where the
> viewer is set
> >to "fixed" in the OBJECT tag, but also in others.
> >I think a strict separation of the behaviors highlight, move,
> zoom, full is
> >very useful to clarify the actual behavior.
> >
> >Have a look at the following sequence:
>
> Okay, then you are assuming (correct?) that the object element
> had a param
> sub-element of type 'fixed' with valueYES, to prevent the sort of user
> interaction (which I embed in your example below) that would make
> it useless...
Correct.

>
> >abc.cgm#id(myView,zoom)
>
> (User interaction with IsoView controls:  zoom in 16x on some
> little detail
> far outside of the 'myView' rectangle.)
If the user had the opportunity to step in here, he would create a problem.
If the 4 lines of code happen in a sequence, there won't be a problem.

>
> >abc.cgm#name(myFirstObj,highlight)
> >abc.cgm#name(mySecondObj,highlight)
> >abc.cgm#id(myThirdObj,highlight)
>
> I understand your use case now.
good.

>
> Question.  Is it clear that FIXED applies only to user manipulation of
> viewer controls, and not also to view manipulation via
> objBehavior keywords
> in URL fragment?  (IMO, in the present wording, that is not completely
> obvious and unambiguous, and should be made so if that's what we intend.)
Good point. We want to stop the user from interfering with the author's
intent.
It's the author who wrote the URLs with fragments, the XCFs, and/or DOM
scripts.
So FIXED should continue to be restricted to controls that are under the
control
of the end user.
If the end user types in a URL with a fragment in IE, he is leaving the
application,
so that doesn't apply here.

Regards,
Dieter

>
> -Lofton.
>
>
>
>