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: "null" to "empty string"

At 07:42 PM 9/6/2005 -0400, Benoit Bezaire wrote:
>we agreed that 'nothing to return' for WebCGMString would return
>an empty string (i.e., "" in JS). See:
>There were no objections or alternate proposal sent to the mailing

As I mentioned earlier, this resolution was not completely implemented in 
the CD2 text.  Here is the proposed fix (in detail).

Following are the places where the null / empty-string distinction might 
apply.  I have indicated any needed changes:

(WebCGMNode.)nodeValue:  in the table above change the 4 occurrences of 
"null" to "empty string".
(WebCGMNode.)namespaceURI:  change "null" to "empty string"
(WebCGMNode.)prefix:  change "null" to "empty string"
(WebCGMNode.)localName:  change "null" to "empty string"
(WebCGMNode.)getAttributeNS return value:  okay (already says "empty string")
(WebCGMPicture.)getAppStructureAttr return value:  okay (already says 
"empty string")
(WebCGMAttr.)name:  s/is different from null/is different from empty string/
(WebCGMAttr.)value:  says nothing, but refers to getAppStructureAttr (so 
does that suffice?)

All okay so far?

These are all attributes or method return values of type WebCGMString, 
where the question might reasonably arise.  For some others, like 
WebCGMPicture.pictid, nothing is said, but it corresponds to the CGM BegPic 
identifier parameter.  I figure if that was "" in the metafile, then it was 
unambiguous that the implementation would return "".  Reasonable?  Or 
should we say something?

If no objections, I will implement these changes in the text.


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