Re: [cgmo-webcgm] getAppStructureExtent() was getObjectExtent()

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

Stuart, All --

A question comes up.  Which bounding box?  Do you mean:

1.) the BB of the coordinates of the APS's graphical primitive elements, as 
written in the metafile itself?
2.) or, the effective BB, which would reflect a non-trival CTM (current 
transformation matrix)?
3.) or, something else (e.g., 'region' factored in)?
4.) or, should it be parameter selectable (#1 or #2 or ...)?

Related question:  are things like line-width accounted for in the BB, or not?

(Does anyone recall our original use case(s)?  That might help to answer 
the questions.)

-Lofton.

At 10:45 AM 2/23/2008 -0700, Lofton Henderson wrote:
>Stuart --
>
>Good job, especially the completeness by looking at every section for 
>needed changes.
>
>One small nit...
>
>At 04:09 PM 2/22/2008 -0800, Galt, Stuart A wrote:
>>Markups for getAppStructureExtent()
>>
>>Chapter 1 - no changes
>>Chapter 2 - no changes
>>Chapter 3 - no changes
>>Chapter 4 - no changes
>>
>>In 5.7.6 add to the IDL list
>>
>>WebCGMString             getAppStructureExtent();
>>
>>Add to the method descriptions:
>>
>>getAppStructureExtent()
>>         Retrieves the bounding box rectangle of the graphic elements
>>within an APS.  The rectangle is defined the two corner points.
>>Parameters
>>         None
>>Return Value
>>         WebCGMString; the bounding rectangle min and max pairs stored in
>>a string, or the empty string if the APS contains no graphical elements.
>
>I seem to recall that we decided, about rectangles, that we would always 
>parameterize as two diagonally-opposite corner points.  So instead of
>
>xmin,xmax,ymin,ymax
>or
>xmin,ymin,xmax,ymax
>
>it would be:
>x1,y1,x2,y2 (the coordinates of P1,P2, which are two diagonally-opposite 
>corner points).
>
>This looks similar to xmin,ymin,xmax,ymax, but it allows the use of either 
>pair of diagonally-opposite corner points, whereas the min-max only allows 
>for the one pair.
>
>It is a small point.  But it is at variance with present (2.0) practice in 
>Ch.3 and Ch.5, and I seem to recall some earlier resolution to stick with 
>the way of CGM:1999 and WebCGM 2.0.
>
>Does anyone want to argue for min/max pairs?
>
>-Lofton.
>
>>Exceptions
>>         None
>>
>>Chapter 6 - no changes
>>Chapter 7 - no changes
>>Chapter 8
>>
>>Add to WebCGMAppStructure object methods:
>>
>>getAppStructureExtent()
>>         This method has no parameters.
>>         This method returns a String
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Stuart Galt
>>SGML Resource Group
>>stuart.a.galt@boeing.com
>>(206) 544-3656
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>>at:
>>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>