Re: [cgmo-webcgm] Confusing rules in WebCGM spec

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

Hello Ian,

Good observation!  The check-box form of the profile in the ISO
standard did not translate very well to the yes/no format of the WebCGM
profile.

If/when WebCGM is republished, we'll have a look at clarifying this and
any other such cases (I imagine there are others that didn't translate
well).

Thanks for the comment,
-Lofton.

At 01:34 PM 8/29/2012 -0500, Ian Proudfoot  (By way of
dlarson@cgmlarson.com) wrote:

Lofton

 

I thought you might better answer this webcgm spec question.

 

Don Larson.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello again Don,

 

I have just noticed a presentation error in the WebCGM specification. I m still preparing the profile in XML format and I was working on T20.37 where the specification states:

 

Any restrictions on the set of values for the line cap indicator? (choose 1 or both)

Yes; values 1..4;

No; subset of registered values (attach list).

 

On its own this makes almost no sense. Then I looked at the ISO version where it  is presented like this:

 

Any restrictions on the set of values for the line cap indicator? (choose 1 or both)

þ  values 1..5;

¨ subset of registered values (attach list).

 

Now it makes perfect sense, what do you think?

 

Ian

 

 



 

Découvrez

www.antea.fr

 

Rejoignez-nous sur



Ian PROUDFOOT

Technical Director

 

 

Email : ian.proudfoot@antea.fr

 

3 rue Etienne Dolet | 93400 Saint-Ouen | France

Tel : + 33 (0)1 58 61 23 00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5232 - Release Date: 08/29/12