Re: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION. Can viewers detect links from non-CGM content?

[Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>]

Was this discussed at a telecon or did we simply not get any responses
yet?

-- 
 Benoit   mailto:benoit@itedo.com

 
Thursday, October 6, 2005, 12:10:52 PM, Lofton wrote:

LH> Once again, it would be interesting to hear from implementors.  What have
LH> you done about the 1.0 specification, "CGM viewers shall ignore picture
LH> behavior specifications in URI fragments which are part of links from
LH> non-CGM content."?

LH> At 02:36 PM 10/5/2005 -0600, Robert Orosz wrote:
>>[...]
>>3) I do not have improved wording for this.  I raised the question because
>>the current wording "CGM viewers shall ..." sounds to me like a conformance
>>requirement being placed on the viewer.  I do not know the answer, and I too
>>have never programmed that part of a viewer before.  If the viewer cannot
>>determine the source of a link, then that sentence should be deleted.
>>[...]
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 7:08 PM
>>To: Robert Orosz; cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
>>Subject: Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Chapter 3 review
>>
>>[...]
>> >
>> >Section 3.1.2.2
>> >
>> >In the middle of this section is the following statement: "CGM viewers
>>shall
>> >ignore picture behavior specifications in URI fragments which are part of
>> >links from non-CGM content."  I'm curious, how does the CGM viewer know the
>> >source of a link?
>>
>>Good question.  I don't know the answer.  What would happen is probably
>>something like this:  a viewer control/plugin is fired up to display the
>>CGM specified in the HTML-to-CGM link.  If the HTML contains the behavior
>>in the 'target' attribute of the 'a' element, it does all the implied
>>window management and starts the viewer.  It gets a fragment.  If the
>>fragment contains a picBehavior part, then the viewer would immediately be
>>faced with some potential windowing operation, like opening a new window
>>(_blank).  I can see what the original wording is trying to avoid, but
>>don't know if we're saying it best.  (And I haven't programmed this part of
>>a viewer -- the control/plugin interface and window management.)

LH> -Lofton.