Fwd: another WebCGM spec glitch

[Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>]

I have had two responses.  Both of them use all lower case in generated 
content.

I.e., "linkuri" instead of "linkURI", and "viewcontext" instead of 
"ViewContext".

I expect that there are about 3-4 others who ought to weigh in on 
this.  But so far, it's unanimous and we will accordingly clarify the 
contradictory sections of the spec.

Please speak up if you have an opinion, or if you have some implementation 
information.

-Lofton.


>X-Sender: lofton@terminal.rockynet.com
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
>Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 18:30:09 -0600
>To: cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org
>From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
>Subject: another WebCGM spec glitch
>X-RCPT-TO: <lofton@rockynet.com>
>
>CGM Open Members (esp vendors) --
>
>Please consider and reply ASAP -- WebCGM 1.0 Second Release is dependent 
>upon answers.
>
>Now that it is clearly specified that WebCGM SF strings are **case 
>sensitive**, we have a little cleanup to do.
>
>The content model of section 3.3 disagrees with the individual sections 
>3.2.1.1 - 3.2.1.4 and sections 3.2.2.1 - 3.2.2.8.  Everything in the 
>Content Model is lower case, and the sections tend to use "camel 
>case".  (Both the content model and the sections are normatively 
>referenced from the PPF, so we need to clean it up.).
>
>Specifically:
>
>CM                      Sections
>====================
>layer                   (same)
>grobject                (same)
>para                    (same)
>subpara         (same)
>
>region                  (same)
>viewcontext             ViewContext
>linkuri                 LinkURI
>layername               LayerName
>layerdescription        LayerDescription
>screentip               ScreenTip
>name                    (same)
>content         (same)
>
>It would be nice to pick a consistent style (like all lower case, or all 
>camel case).  But more important is:  what has been implemented?  I 
>suspect that viewer implementations rely on case-insensitive (and if I 
>were an viewer implementor, I would continue to be forgiving, regardless 
>of what the spec says).
>
>What about content?  What have people generated so far?  (MetaCheck will 
>not be forgiving, so we may as well preserve validity of as much content 
>as possible.)
>
>Please send your votes and comments as soon as possible.
>
>Regards,
>-Lofton.
>
>*******************
>Lofton Henderson
>1919 Fourteenth St., #604
>Boulder, CO   80302
>
>Phone:  303-449-8728
>Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
>*******************
>