re[3]: [cgmo-webcgm] Problem with OBJECT and PARAM tags

[Don Larson <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>]

Lofton,

 >  It seems that several (at least 2) people didn't use the 'data' attribute
 >  of the OBJECT tag, and used a proprietary solution of a 'src' PARAM
 >  instead. But no one raised the issue that 'data' **did not work** in IE if
 >  used together with a PARAM. I.e., that the example in 3.4 doesn't work in
 >  IE.
 >
 >  Don, you mention "src=" in the 1.0 tests. From memory and a quick look,
 >  this is a "src="..."" attribute on an html FRAME tag. Do you see it
 >  usedanywhere else? Are you referring to the dynamic tests in the 1.0 Test
 >  Suite, or rather to the Static tests that were added to the 2.0 Test Suite
 >  (which use a DOM interface to load the CGM). AFAICT, the OBJECT element is
 >  not used anywhere in the 1.0 test suite. Am I missing something?
 >

 

I was referring to dynamic tests in which I do not see PARAM SRC used anyhwere

but here's the interesting thing about IE and the FRAME tag.

 

When a cgm is inserted into a frame, a cgm viewer plugin is loaded by IE and IE sets

the "src" property = URL specified by "src" keyword of the FRAME tag just like it

came from a PARAM NAME="SRC" VALUE="url".  

 

This why all the 1.0 dynnic test work with our viewer and non support of

OBJECT DATA in our viewer a non issue up to now.

 

I think that we need to address Benoit's issue though as this could be an

interoperability issue in the long term.  We are going to do some reseach

here into using OBJECT DATA versus PARAM SRC keyword.

 

Regards,
Don Larson
Larson Software Technology

 >  Benoit correctly observes, "We will need suggestions on how to move
 >  forward with this."
 >
 >  -Lofton.
 >
 >  [1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmo-webcgm/200604/msg00053.html
 >
 >  At 12:15 PM 6/1/2010 -0500, Don Larson wrote:
 >  Lofton,
 >  > +1 to Benoit's question.
 >  >
 >  > Could we now please hear from everyone who has experience with this
 >  issue?
 >  > Vendors and users?
 >  >
 >  > It appears that we are going to need to find a way forward -- either a
 >  > workaround, or a quick addendum to the standard, or cascaded profile, or
 >  > ...
 >  >
 >  > Don, is there a reason that you choose 'src' as the param name? I have
 >  > seen it used before in proprietary extensions. (Maybe it is just the
 >  > obvious choice, but I'm wondering if it shows up in any published
 >  > examples.)
 >  >
 >
 >  We have used SRC starting with our first WebCGM 1.0 implementation
 >  since what works on all the WebCGM 1.0 and 2.0 tests too.
 >
 >  It's interesting to note that all of the WebCGM 1.0 tests use src= "to" pass
 >  the cgm file name and not 'data'.
 >
 >  I have always though that SRC was a valid PARAM keyword in WebCGM 1.0 but
 >  after quick reivew of the 1.0 spec, I see that I was mistaken.
 >  http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-WebCGM/REC-03-CGM-IC.html#webcgm_3_4
 >
 >  Don.
 >
 >  > -Lofton.
 >  >
 >  > At 10:41 AM 6/1/2010 -0400, Bezaire, Benoit wrote:
 >  >
 >  > May I ask why this knowledge wasn t shared with the group? We could (for
 >  > example) have standardized the src param in WebCGM 2.1
 >  >
 >  > From: Don Larson [mailto:dlarson@cgmlarson.com]
 >  > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 10:25 AM
 >  > To: Bezaire, Benoit; cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
 >  > Subject: re: [cgmo-webcgm] Problem with OBJECT and PARAM tags
 >  >
 >  > Benoit
 >  >
 >  > >
 >  > > Hi All,
 >  > >
 >  > > It has come to our attention that IE has a limitation related to the
 >  > > <object> data attribute and <PARAM> elements. Our implementation
 >  > > (COleControl ActiveX) is passed in corrupted data when both the data
 >  > > attribute is specified on the <object> tag and when <PARAM> elements
 >  are
 >  > > also specified.
 >  > >
 >  > > According to Microsoft, HTML 4 doesn t state that an implementation
 >  (of
 >  > > HTML) has to pass all values ( data attribute, <PARAM>s)
 >  simultaneously
 >  > > to the ActiveX. Either data without <PARAM> is used; or <PARAM>s
 >  without
 >  > > the data attribute is used.
 >  > >
 >  > > Which means that WebCGM s example (shown below) doesn t work with a
 >  > > standard ActiveX implementation:
 >  > > <script type="application/ecmascript"> <![CDATA[
 >  > > function myHandler(evt)
 >  > > {
 >  > > // performs DOM manipulation calls...
 >  > > }
 >  > > ]]>
 >  > > </script>
 >  > > [...]
 >  > > <object data="javascript:void(0);" type="image/cgm;Version=4;ProfileId=WebCGM"
 >  > > width="200" height="100">
 >  > > <param name="onload" value="myHandler(evt);"/>
 >  > > </object>
 >  > >
 >  > > Are other Windows vendors aware of this? Do other vendors use
 >  > > DoPropExchange to get the <PARAM>s?
 >  > >
 >  >
 >  > We are somewhat aware of problem in using "DATA" to get the cgm file
 >  > stream.
 >  >
 >  > We are still using DoPropExchange to get cgm file via PARAM and SRC
 >  > keyword.
 >  >
 >  > > There is possibly a workaround that can be implemented in ActiveX
 >  > > implementation (not tested yet), but that being said, maybe we want to
 >  > put
 >  > > some thoughts in how to use the OBJECT tag in a properly supported IE
 >  > way.
 >  > >
 >  >
 >  > > Regards,
 >  > > Benoit
 >  > >
 >  >
 >  > Regards,
 >  > Don Larson
 >  > Larson Software Technology
 >  > Tel: (713)977.4177 ext. 102
 >  > www.cgmlarson.com