[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: re[8]: [cgmo-webcgm] review of aci files
Don (et al),
1.) Okay, I would suggest to replace 'arial' with 'helvetica', if that
doesn't disrupt the purpose of the test. The alternative would be to edit
the file in an editor that can add FontProp -- it appears that Forrest has
such capability; PTC might, but I don't know.
2.) While I don't feel all that strongly about 2.1-valid versus 2.0-valid
(or even 1.0 valid), I'm less comfortable with having WebCGM source files
that are WebCGM-invalid. It is possible to do a FontSub test without that.
In my long answer of yesterday, I recalled our long arguments on this point
at Boston and elsewhere -- is FontSub a general facility for cleaning up
toxic metafiles? or is it a facility for matching the fonts of
WebCGM-valid files to the resources available to the viewer at display
time? I believe our principal *official* motivation for font-sub inclusion
in 2.1 was the latter, as I said yesterday. That said, we all know it is
also going to be used for toxic-metafile cleanup.
So ... if we go forward for now with font-sub tests that are WebCGM-invalid
-- i.e., a nonsense font name without the required matching (nonsense)
FontProp -- then I would like the test to be very explicit that the
metafile is WebCGM-invalid. The test documentation should say this, and it
would be nice if the test documented itself with graphical text.
Long term, I would much prefer that WebCGM instances in the Test Suite be
WebCGM-valid when possible (and maybe create a demo or sample collection of
toxic metafiles and other interesting applications of the 2.1 features.)
That's just my opinion. If the TC endorses less demanding conventions ...
okay, I can live with it.
Other thoughts?
-Lofton.
At 09:01 AM 3/26/2009 -0500, Don wrote:
>Lofton,
>
>I had a quick look at the ACI related CGMs that use Arial and
>determined that Arial can be replaced with Helvetica which will
>eliminate the need for FONT PROPERTIES in most of the CGMs.
>
>That would leave a couple of font substitution tests that would be
>without FONT PROPERTIES. But because I have purposely
>used non existent fonts, I don't think it makes any sense to
>fabricate the FONT PROPERTIES for these special cases.
>
>Regards,
>Don
>Larson Software Technology
>
> > 1.) Is 'arial' font in the FONT LIST a critical part of the test?
>
> > 2.) If 'yes' ... is there anyone (i.e., *any* TC member) who could
> help by
> > editing and generating a FONT PROPERTIES element?
>
> > Thanks,
> > -Lofton.
>
> > At 01:07 PM 3/23/2009 -0500, Don wrote:
> > >Lofton,
> > >
> > > > Hi Don,
> > >
> > > > Do you have your own binary-clearText conversion capability? I
> ask
> > > because
> > > > FONT PROPERTIES is a place where there is a bug in 'cgmconv'
> (old HSI
> > > > product, now in Ulrich's hands).
> > >
> > >No I don't. I was counting on cgmconv for this.
> > >
> > >Don.
> > >
> > > > Btw, did you mean to reply just to me alone, or ReplyAll to the TC?
> > >
> > >I meant to reply to TC. I will pay closer attention to this.
> > >
> > >
> > > > -Lofton.
> > >
> > > > At 10:19 AM 3/23/2009 -0500, Don wrote:
> > > > >Lofton,
> > > > >
> > > > > > Don -- the action item is back to you to correct the
> metafile
> > > errors
> > > > > from
> > > > > > Rob and Ulrich. Can you fix these problems? (Matrix [1] is
> > > > updated.)
> > > > >
> > > > >1-4 are no problem and I think I can use a ClearText copy of CGM
> > and
> > > > >add a Font Properties with editor then convert back to Binary CGM
> > files.
> > > > >
> > > > >Don.
> > > > > > Rob, Ulrich, All --
> > > > >
> > > > > > Does this accurately summarize the metafile problems, as
> > > detected by
> > > > > > MetaCheck (and reviewers)?
> > > > >
> > > > > > 1.) Max VDC Extent violation;
> > > > > > 2.) "ColourClass:colour" problem (MetaCheck bug);
> > > > > > 3.) ProfileEd is 2.0 (ought to be 2.1);
> > > > > > 4.) Max Colour Index violation;
> > > > > > 5.) Font List violation ('arial' in Font List but no Font
> > > Properties
> > > > > > element).
> > > > >
> > > > > > Overall opinion: While these problems must be fixed,
> they are
> > in
> > > > some
> > > > > > sense "formal", and I think most of them will not affect an
> > > > > implementor's
> > > > > > ability to use the file. The overall structure and
> content of
> > the
> > > > > test is
> > > > > > appropriate. Details:
> > > > >
> > > > > > #1: the MaxVdcExt element is a pain in the butt! Should
> never
> >
> > > have
> > > > > been
> > > > > > added to CGM:1999. But ... there it is, so may as well bite
> > the
> > > > > bullet and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > make it right. (IMHO, this is purely a "formal" error --
> > > should have
> > > > no
> > > > > > practical impact on early users of the test.)
> > > > > > #2: metacheck bug, nothing need be changed.
> > > > > > #3: ought to be 2.1 for new metafiles in the 2.1 test suite,
> > yes?
> > > > (See
> > > > > > Rob's comments below about this -- MetaCheck will gripe
> but we
> > know
> > > > it's
> > > > > > not a problem.)
> > > > > > #4: Another "formal" violation -- I would expect minimal
> > > impact on
> > > > > early
> > > > > > users of the test.
> > > > > > #5: This is somewhat at the heart of the test. While it
> > > *might* not
> > > > > > impact early users of the test, on the other hand it
> might. It
> >
> > > could
> > > > be
> > > > > > fixed by either changing the font to 'helvetica', or by
> adding
> > > a Font
> > > > > > Properties element.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts (anyone)?
> > > > >
> > > > > > Btw, once these metafile problems are resolved, we will
> have a
> > big
> > > > > batch of
> > > > > >
> > > > > > tests ready for "Approved", I think.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > -Lofton.
> > > > >
> > > > > > [1] ftp://ftp.cgmlarson.com/test-matrix.htm
> > > > >
> > > > > > At 05:02 PM 3/19/2009 -0600, Robert Orosz wrote:
> > > > > > >Don,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >The binary CGMs that you've submitted are invalid. I've
> > attached a
> > > > ZIP
> > > > > > file
> > > > > > >containing the MetaCheck trace output for each.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Lofton,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Please reset the status of these tests to reworking.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > aciDefaultFont
> > > > > > > aciEdgeAttr
> > > > > > > aciFontNormalization
> > > > > > > aciGenericFonts
> > > > > > > aciHatchStyleDef
> > > > > > > aciLineAttr
> > > > > > > aciLineEdgeTypeDef
> > > > > > > aciMapListOrder
> > > > > > > aciMitreLimit
> > > > > > > aciRestrictedTextType
> > > > > > > aciSimpleFontSubsitution
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >The CGM conformance violation is the same in each;
> namely, the
> >
> > > VDC
> > > > > Extent
> > > > > > >exceeds the specified Maximum VDC Extent. Each CGM has
> (1,1)
> > > > > (-1,-1) for
> > > > > > >the Maximum VDC Extent and that is well exceeded by the VDC
> > > Extent
> > > > > in each
> > > > > > >case.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >These CGMs also highlight an inconsistency in the WebCGM
> > > > > profile. T.16.8
> > > > > > >allows for 16-bit color index precision. However,
> T.16.9 caps
> >
> > > the
> > > > > maximum
> > > > > > >color index at 255, i.e. effectively limiting you to only
> > 8-bit
> > > > color
> > > > > > index
> > > > > > >precision. We should make these two table rows in the PPF
> > > > > consistent with
> > > > > > >each other.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >More later,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Rob
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > >From: 'Don Larson (E-mail)' [mailto:dlarson@cgmlarson.com]
> > > > > > >Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 7:37 AM
> > > > > > >To: Lofton Henderson
> > > > > > >Cc: 'CGM Open WebCGM TC'
> > > > > > >Subject: re[4]: [cgmo-webcgm] review of aci files
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Lofton,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I have corrected and updated the following ACI files:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > aciFontNormalization.aci
> > > > > > > aciLineAttr.aci
> > > > > > > aciHatchStyleDef.aci
> > > > > > > aciMitreLimit.aci
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Also all the ACI related CGMs have been converted to binary:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > aciDefaultFont.cgm
> > > > > > > aciEdgeAttr.cgm
> > > > > > > aciFontNormalization.cgm
> > > > > > > aciGenericFonts.cgm
> > > > > > > aciHatchStyleDef.cgm
> > > > > > > aciLineAttr.cgm
> > > > > > > aciLineEdgeTypeDef.cgm
> > > > > > > aciMapListOrder.cgm
> > > > > > > aciMitreLimit.cgm
> > > > > > > aciRestrictedTextType.cgm
> > > > > > > aciSimpleFontSubsitution.cgm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Regards,
> > > > > > >Don
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > At 10:22 AM 3/17/2009 -0500, Forrest Carpenter wrote:
> > > > > > > > >Don,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciMitreLimit aci file <mitreLimit limitVal=5 />
> > > > > > > > > should be <mitreLimit limitVal="5" />
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciRestrictedTextType aci file OK
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciLineEdgeType aci file OK
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciHatchStyleDef aci file </hatchStyleDef>
> > > > > > > > > should be />
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciLineAtt aci file <lineCap lineCapInd=2
> > > lineDashInd=3 />
> > > > > > > > > <lineJoin lineJoinInd=4 />
> > > > > > > > > <lineTypeCont lineContMode=3 />
> > > > > > > > > Should be <lineCap lineCapInd="2"
> > > lineDashInd="3"
> > > > />
> > > > > > > > > <lineJoin lineJoinInd="4" />
> > > > > > > > > <lineTypeCont lineContMode="3" />
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciEdgeAtt aci file OK
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciFontNormalization aci file <fontmap> and </fontmap>
> > > > > > > > > should be <fontMap> and </fontMap>
> > > > > > > > >CGM file is clear text, should be binary
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Regards,
> > > > > > > > >Forrest
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > >From: Don Larson (E-mail)
> [mailto:dlarson@cgmlarson.com]
> > > > > > > > >Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:02 AM
> > > > > > > > >To: Lofton Henderson
> > > > > > > > >Cc: CGM Open WebCGM TC
> > > > > > > > >Subject: re[2]: [cgmo-webcgm] review of aci files
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Lofton,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >All of the following ACI files have been updated by
> > adding-
> > > > > > > > > <?xml version = "1.0" ?>
> > > > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig SYSTEM "webConfig.dtd">
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >aciFontNormalization
> > > > > > > > >aciGenericFonts
> > > > > > > > >aciMapListOrder
> > > > > > > > >aciLineAttr
> > > > > > > > >aciEdgeAttr
> > > > > > > > >aciLineEdgeTypeDef
> > > > > > > > >aciHatchStyleDef
> > > > > > > > >aciEdgeAttr.aci
> > > > > > > > >aciHatchStyleDef.aci
> > > > > > > > >aciLineAttr.aci
> > > > > > > > >aciLineEdgeTypeDef.aci
> > > > > > > > >aciMitreLimit.aci
> > > > > > > > >aciRestrictedTextType.aci
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Regards,
> > > > > > > > >Don L.
> > > > > > > > >Larson Software Technology
> > > > > > > > >www.cgmlarson.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Don,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > When you have corrected this, on every ACI file,
> > could
> > > > you
> > > > > > please
> > > > > > > > inform
> > > > > > > > > > the TC via the TC list?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Then I'll update the matrix and we'll be
> ready for
> > > final
> > > > > steps
> > > > > > >toward
> > > > > > > > TC
> > > > > > > > > > "Approved".
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > -Lofton.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > At 02:57 PM 3/16/2009 -0500, Forrest Carpenter
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Lofton,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > None of the aci files in the test suite are valid
> > xml
> > > > files.
> > > > > > Don
> > > > > > >has
> > > > > > > > > > corrected one error I pointed out in his latest
> > update
> > > > > but all
> > > > > > aci
> > > > > > > > files
> > > > > > > > > > in the test suite are missing the two lines
> below,
> > the
> > > > first
> > > > > > line
> > > > > > >is
> > > > > > > > > > required and the second line should be included
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > <?xml version = "1.0" ?>
> > > > > > > > > > <!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig SYSTEM "webConfig.dtd">
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > Forrest
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > From: Lofton Henderson
> [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 1:33 PM
> > > > > > > > > > To: Forrest Carpenter; 'WebCGM'
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [cgmo-webcgm] review of aci files
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Forrest,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > At 09:41 AM 3/10/2009 -0500, Forrest Carpenter
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I don t believe the aci files provided in the
> tests
> >
> > > are
> > > > > valid.
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > >have
> > > > > > > > > > attached an example of what I believe the files
> > should
> > > > look
> > > > > > like.
> > > > > > >I
> > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > also found one error in the DTD, dashlength
> should
> > be
> > > > changed
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > dashLength.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Can you be specific, what files you are referring
> > to?
> > > > I.e.,
> > > > > > list
> > > > > > > > them?
> > > > > > > > > > You had the Action to review these 7:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > aciFontNormalization
> > > > > > > > > > aciGenericFonts
> > > > > > > > > > aciMapListOrder
> > > > > > > > > > aciLineAttr
> > > > > > > > > > aciEdgeAttr
> > > > > > > > > > aciLineEdgeTypeDef
> > > > > > > > > > aciHatchStyleDef
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Does your comment apply to all 7 of these?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Then Don sent an update message saying he had
> > updated
> > > > this
> > > > > > >different
> > > > > > > > set
> > > > > > > > > > of files:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > aciEdgeAttr.aci
> > > > > > > > > > aciHatchStyleDef.aci
> > > > > > > > > > aciLineAttr.aci
> > > > > > > > > > aciLineEdgeTypeDef.aci
> > > > > > > > > > aciMitreLimit.aci
> > > > > > > > > > aciRestrictedTextType.aci
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I'm getting a little lost, trying to track the
> > > status of
> > > > > > "Review"
> > > > > > >or
> > > > > > > > > > "Reworking", and who has the action item, in the
> > > matrix.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -Lofton.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the
> OASIS TC
> >
> > > that
> > > > > > generates this mail. Follow this link to 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. Follow this link to 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. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]