[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: QUESTION: allow grnode as child of para and subpara?
Ref: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200509/msg00093.html Comments: 36 ========== QUESTION: should the content model allow grnode to be a child of para or subpara? DISCUSSION: Dieter writes, "Since both [para & subpara] may contain graphical data, i.e. polygonized text, shouldn't grnode be allowed in here as well? I am not sure, because grnode may contain grobject etc, so probably not. However, if not, the text in 184.108.40.206 needs to be changed, where the Viewer Behavior suggests that a grnode's direct ancestor could be a para or subpara." The simplest solution is to fix the editorial glitch (about grnode's direct ancestor possibly being para or subpara). Unless we have a compelling use case to change the content model, I think we should leave it alone. RECOMMENDATION: fix the wording in 3.1.5, removing para & subpara from the "Viewer behavior" paragraph. Regards, -Lofton.