RE: editing -- oops, correction

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

At 08:26 AM 4/11/01 -0600, Kevin O'Kane wrote:
>Lofton,
>    When you say final proposal to Dave  do you mean the changes to the
>definitions of pictseqno and pictid as well as option number 3:

Kevin,

No there was one subsequent message.  See below.  Basically, touched up the 
"pictseqno" paragraph a little more, and implemented option 2 ( (digit)+ in 
the EBNF, and words in the paragraph "shall correspond to a positive integer").

Regards,
Lofton.

Copied message follows...


>Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 17:29:51 -0600
>From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
>Subject: RE: editing -- oops, correction
>X-Sender: lofton@terminal.rockynet.com
>To: "Cruikshank, David W" <David.Cruikshank@PSS.Boeing.com>
>Cc: cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
>List-Owner: <mailto:cgmopen-members-help@lists.oasis-open.org>
>List-Post: <mailto:cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org>
>List-Subscribe:
>  <mailto:cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=subscribe>
>List-Unsubscribe:
>  <mailto:cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/cgmopen-members>
>List-Help: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/doc/email-manage.html>,
>  <mailto:cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org?body=help>
>X-RCPT-TO: <lofton@rockynet.com>
>
>At 03:13 PM 4/10/01 -0700, Cruikshank, David W wrote:
> >However picseqno was already changed in the current errata from "[0-9]+"
> >to "[1-9][0-9]*".  Do we need to go back and undo this??
> >[...]
> > > I too am leaning toward option 2 also...any others?
>
>Dave,
>
>The problem I have now with the [1-9][0-9]* is this:  it isn't obvious to
>me that that expression, if placed in the EBNF, designates the digit
>characters -- a string is required at that place in the fragment -- as
>opposed to a binary numeric value (for example).  It is probably okay, but
>I'm too tired of this to think it through.  On the other hand, I know that
>(digit)* represents a string.
>
>So I think this will all comments -- you, Dieter, Harry, me:
>
>1. use my earlier proposed revised wording for pictid,
>2. use (digit)+ instead of [1-9]+ or [1-9][0-9]*.
>3. for pictseqno paragraph, use this slight modification of my earlier
>proposal (handles positive, allows leading zeros):
>
>pictseqno - The pictseqno [Ed: use same font as 1st word] keyword indicates
>that selection of the picture to be viewed is by the sequence number of the
>picture in the metafile. "1" is the first picture, "2" is the second
>picture, etc. An all-digit string representing the picture sequence number
>value is the first, required parameter associated with the keyword (see
>EBNF), and there may be a second associated parameter, whose value is an
>optional picture behavior specification.  The picture sequence number value
>shall be positive. If the specified picture sequence value exceeds the
>number of pictures in the metafile, the last picture is displayed.
>
>I don't expect any objections -- this accommodates everyone's first choice.
>
>-Lofton.
>
> > > thx...Dave
> > >
> > >       ----------
> > >       From:   Dieter@isodraw.de[SMTP:Dieter@isodraw.de]
> > >       Reply To:       Dieter
> > >       Sent:   Tuesday, April 10, 2001 2:26 PM
> > >       To:     Dieter; Cruikshank, David W; Lofton Henderson
> > >       Cc:     cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org
> > >       Subject:        Re: editing -- oops, correction
> > >
> > >       Lofton,
> > >
> > >       see my comments below:
> > >
> > >       > I think the change is correct, but the wording of the sections
> > is poor
> > >       (who
> > >       > wrote this stuff?!):
> > >       John.
> > >
> > >       > ### begin ###
> > >       > pictid - The pictid [Ed: use same font as 1st word] keyword
> > indicates that
> > >       > selection of the picture to be viewed is by the id of the
> > picture, which
> > >       is
> > >       > the id parameter in the BEGIN PICTURE element. The picture id
> > value is the
> > >       > first, required parameter associated with the keyword (see
> > EBNF), and
> > >       there
> > >       > may be a second associated parameter, which is an optional 
> picture
> > >       behavior
> > >       > specification.  If the metafile does not contain a picture 
> with the
> > >       > specified picture id value, the first picture in the metafile
> > is chosen.
> > >       Agreed.
> > >
> > >       > pictseqno - The pictseqno [Ed: use same font as 1st word] keyword
> > >       indicates
> > >       > that selection of the picture to be viewed is by the sequence
> > number of
> > >       the
> > >       > picture in the metafile. "1" is the first picture, "2" is the
> > second
> > >       > picture, etc. The picture sequence number value is the first,
> > required
> > >       > parameter associated with the keyword (see EBNF), and there may
> > be a
> > >       second
> > >       > associated parameter, whose value is an optional picture behavior
> > >       > specification.  If the specified picture sequence number value
> > exceeds the
> > >       > number of pictures in the metafile, the last picture is 
> displayed.
> > >       Agreed.
> > >
> > >       > ### end ###
> > >       >
> > >       > Now, the use of "1" (instead of 1) made me look back to the
> > EBNF.  We
> > >       > already have a bug fix to the [0-9]+, to prevent the value 0
> > (ZERO).  So
> > >       > how about this:
> > >       >
> > >       > picseqno ::= (non-zero-digit)(digit)*
> > >       > [...]
> > >       > non-zero-digit ::= "1" | ... | "9"
> > >       > digit ::= "0" | digit
> > >       >
> > >       > Of course, this prevents you from writing picture sequence
> > numbers with
> > >       > leading zeros, "001".  Does anyone care?  If someone objects to
> > this
> > >       > change, then we can leave it as (digit)+ (which is better, I
> > think, than
> > >       > [0-9]+), and add to the 3.1.2.1, before the "exceeds number of
> > pictures"
> > >       > sentence, "The specified picture sequence number value shall be
> > positive."
> > >       >
> > >       > Please comment:  option 1 (enforce positive via EBNF change,
> > which has the
> > >       > "no leading" ); or, option 2 (enforce positive via words in
> > 3.1.2.1).
> > >       This is my preference, but any of the three sounds good to me.
> > >
> > >       >
> > >       > Or option 3:  (digit)*(non-zero-digit)(digit)*   (BNF
> > expression for
> > >       > positive, leading zeros allowed!).
> > >       >
> > >
> > >       Dieter
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >       ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >       To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> > >       "unsubscribe" in the body to:
> > cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> >"unsubscribe" in the body to: cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
>"unsubscribe" in the body to: cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org