RE: [cgmo-webcgm] COMMENTS: Chapter 5

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

I recall that as well. I had a short window of time to review the spec... couldn't afford to go back and re-read all the threads. I wanted to put that in my comments and make sure we don't lose track of it.

 

Ben

---

From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 11:47 AM
To: Bezaire, Benoit; CGM Open WebCGM TC
Subject: Re: [cgmo-webcgm] COMMENTS: Chapter 5

Hi Benoit,

About your 'grnode' comments...

We had a 
long thread about changes to clarify the details of 'grnode'.  There were 
some agreements, and some open questions.  As I recall, we left it as 
needing fuller issue discussion during the 60-day.

Speaking just for 
myself, I need to go back and refresh my memory on what (if anything) we 
previously agreed in that thread.  Then pick up and factor in your new 
comments...

At 11:30 AM 5/6/2008 -0400, Bezaire, Benoit wrote:
> 5.3: I 
>   think we should change - The target APS must not be of type 'grnode'. 'grnode' 
>   elements are not accessible via DOM calls. -  with
> : The target APS must not be of type 'grnode'. 'grnode' 
>   elements are not accessible via the XCF in this version of 
>   WebCGM.
>  
> 5.4.4.1: I think this is 
>   wrong: Successive basic operations are performed by left-multiplying the 
>   matrices corresponding to the operations - we need to post-multiply, not 
>   pre-multiply. There's a distinction between which 'transforms' happens first 
>   vs which 'matrix' is first.
>  
> 5.4.4.2: Not sure if we should give the 'red' example? It raises 
>   questions about specified, computed and actual values. Aren't the inheritance 
>   rules the same for transforms than other style properties (with the exception 
>   of 'replace' and 'combine').
>  
> 5.7.4: Should we add a general statement here to say that 'grnode's can 
>   be accessed via the WebCGMNode interface?
>  
> 5.7.5: 
> getAppStructureById, it's 
>   unclear if 'grnode's can be retrived by the method, we should 
>   clarify.
> setStyleProperty...
>  
> i) 
>   stroke-type: we should put stroke-type values between " (quotes), see 
>   fill-style. Proposal: remove negative values, how is a script writer going to 
>   know about user defined types?
> ii) 
>   fill-style: Proposal: lets use keywords instead of integers.
> iii) hatch-type: Proposal: could we use keywords? Also, I'd 
>   like to remove negative numbers, again, how would a script writer 
>   know?
> iv) pattern-type: Is this useful? How 
>   would the script writer know?
> v) 
>   fill-offset: Is this useful? How would a script writer know what NVDC values 
>   to use?
> vi) oops, I was going to forget 
>   about 'text-font', it seems underspecified, i.e., what happens if the font is 
>   not on the system? ;-P
>  
> setViewPort: Proposal: rename API to 'setView', it's on the 
>   WebCGMPicture interface, that should be clear enough, no? Also, is there a way 
>   to go back to the original view?
>  
> 5.7.6: 
> i) I think translate, rotate 
>   and scale should use floats as much as possible, not strings.
> ii) getTransformSP, the wording for the type parameter is 
>   confusing. I think we can simplify this. Willing to take an action item on 
>   this 
> one.
>  
>  
>  
>