Lofton,
Saying **did not work** is a bit strong. I’m certain I
tried that sample in our viewer before publishing it. What we heard from
Microsoft is that sometimes the ‘data’ attribute value and the PARAMs
will get corrupted. I’m referring here to an ActiveX DoPropExchange
approach.
One work around, could be for implementations to use the HTML
parsing interface available in IE. We haven’t looked into that yet. I
first wanted to bring up the fact that WebCGM 1.0 (first edition) to WebCGM 2.1
suggests (or mandates) an technique not officially supported by IE (if ActiveX
DoPropExchange is used, which I suspect is what most implementations do).
Another approach could be to standardize <PARAM name=”SRC”
value=”myfile.cgm”>?
Benoit
From: Lofton Henderson
[mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 2:54 PM
To: cgmo-webcgm@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: re[2]: [cgmo-webcgm] Problem with OBJECT and PARAM tags
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 used anywhere 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?
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=""xxx.cgm""
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