RE: Transform Draft

["Bezaire, Benoit" <bbezaire@ptc.com>]

Thanks for the draft Ulrich.

 

Lofton, how precise do we have to be for the first publication?

 

Some quick comments:

- I don't know if the IDL definition supports function overloading (i.e., multiple definition of the same function name, ex: rotate). We may have to offer two rotation functions.

- The 1) section should link back to the NVDC section.

- I think the 'replace' parameter should be a keyword instead of a boolean, ex: add | replace.

- Unfortunately, I do not understand the get/setTransformSP() functions. Could someone provide an example on how this will be used?

- Shouldn't transforms be allowed on grobject, para, subpara and layer(?).

- With the XCF markup, XML doesn't allow us to say:

<grobject apsid="level-1-obj" translate="5 10" scale="2" />

elements can have an order, but not attributes. We will need to use a syntax similar to SVG's.

 

Regards,

Ben

 

---

From: Ulrich Laesche [mailto:laesche@ereviewonline.de]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 9:50 AM
To: 'Cruikshank, David W'; stuart.a.galt@boeing.com; lofton@rockynet.com
Cc: dlarson@cgmlarson.com; forrest@sdicgm.com; franck.duluc@airbus.com; Bezaire, Benoit; Weidenbrueck, Dieter
Subject: WG: Transform Draft

All,

 

Attached is the discussion I had with Lofton over the weekend regarding the transform spec.  ***_draft4 is what Lofton already had a look at, updates*** is the remaining stuff including the table.  We can also remove the bounding box sentence.  It’s a leftover from previous drafts but not needed anymore.

 

Thanks and regards

Ulrich

 

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 8. März 2008 23:58
An: Ulrich Laesche
Betreff: Re: Transform Draft

 

Hi Ulrich,

This is an excellent piece of work.  Please congratulate Airat.

If anything, it is my initial sense that it is might more than we need, particularly the presence of both variants (around origin, and around specified point) for the convenience functions scale, rotate, translate.

There are also some statements that I need to think about -- don't understand on first reading.  E.g., the 1st paragraph of "General remarks", about the need to specify a bounding box via some API.

NEXT STEP:  I think you should get this to the TC as soon as possible.  There are some things that we need to discuss and resolve Wednesday, before I attempt to implement the stuff in the 2.1 draft.  These are complicated technical questions and I don't want to prejudge the answers.

At 11:16 AM 3/8/2008 +0100, Ulrich Laesche wrote:

Hi Lofton,
 
Attached you will find the text for the transform functions.  The text is not structured as in your WebCGM 2.1 draft as we don t know what you want to put into chapter 5.4.4.  It appears as if more than half of the text can go there.

I agree.  I will try to put most of the text there, with references to it.

Airat will still work on the XCF chapter 4 today.  In addition, in his submission he is referring to a Transformation Style Properties Table in accordance with Stuart s text, but I don t see it.  I will thus ask him to prepare one.  If you see topics missing (for example, I find no mentioning on the inheritance or child node behavior issues) please tell him.  Airat should also be available tomorrow so that he can prepare an updated delivery on Sunday evening (PST).

He can put XCF into a separate document, if easier.

Airat also told me that he put the TransformSP functions at the picture interface (as in chapter 5.7.5) while I mentioned we would put them at the APS interface.  I trust Airat here.

Okay.  That is another topic for the TC to discuss.

Thanks,
-Lofton.

Thanks and regards
Ulrich