[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: WebCGM Implementors -- IMPT!
I am fine with "layerdesc". Ulrich > -----Original Message----- > From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com] > Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:48 AM > To: cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: WebCGM Implementors -- IMPT! > > > WebCGM Implementors -- > > (Attn especially Forrest, Don, Dieter, Ulrich, Kevin, Lofton) > > Please respond asap, and make sure to copy Dave Cruikshank. > > Today is the day we are finishing the Second Release text and > forwarding it > (we *must* do so today, or risk significant [weeks] more delay). Of > course, we found another small glitch! I will propose a resolution, but > also I think that "majority of implementations" should rule. > > Problem: > > ** In Chapter 2/figure 2, and in Chapter 3/3.3 (dtd), it is 'layerdesc'. > > ** In 2.3.4 and 3.2.2.5, it is 'layerdescription'. > > There is little to recommend one over the other, except that layerdesc > would be the only case amongst the 8 attributes where the name is > abbreviated (a weak rationale, I'd say). > > The one implementation I know of is MetaCheck 5.18, whose webCGM profile > checking looks for 'layerdesc'. It also seems to me, as we went through > the "case" issue on the ApsAttr types, that most people took their > definitive lists from section 3.3, the DTD. > > Therefore I recommend the resolution: 'layerdesc' > > Please tell me (and Dave) by the end of the day, what does your > implementation do? (If anything -- I suspect that layer > functionality is > not widely implemented yet). > > Regards, > Lofton. > > > ******************* > Lofton Henderson > 1919 Fourteenth St., #604 > Boulder, CO 80302 > > Phone: 303-449-8728 > Email: lofton@rockynet.com > ******************* > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC