Re: display questions

[Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@gmail.com>]

I guess more fundamentally there is a lot of navigation-based stuff
based off of the idea of pages/indexes inside a view, rather than
multiple views, which is isee-specific (or an artifact of this spec
originating at isee, however you want to say it).  I'm not exactly
sure how to resolve that - the nicest way across all vendors might be
to have isee map its current files from single views into multiple
views that happen to be rendered next to each other on the same
canvas.

yours,
Bobby

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Bobby Powers <bobbypowers@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Billy,
>
> I see that you added some pieces today, I have a few concerns
> (especially seeing as if we're holding off on controversial changes
> before voting on Friday, as Will mentioned).  First, you added:
>
> "In order for XMILE views to be more easily navigated views are
> required to specify:
>
> home_page<int> default: 0- The index of the printed page which is
> shown when any link with the home_page target is executed
>
> home_view<bool> default: false – A marker property which is used to
> determine which view is navigated to when any link with the target
> home_view is executed. Only one view for each view type is allowed to
> be marked as the home_view."
>
> This seems very isee-specific.  I don't know of any other vendor that
> uses index of printed pages - can we leave this out of the spec and
> isee can use these it with the 'isee:' namespace prefix?
>
>
> Second, is the visual effects on <link>.  Values are listed as
> "dissolve, checkerboard, bars, wipe_left, wipe_right, wipe_top,
> wipe_bottom, wipe_clockwise, wipe_counterclockwise, iris_in, iris_out,
> doors_close, doors_open, venetian_left, venetian_right, venetian_top,
> venetian_bottom, push_bottom, push_top, push_left, push_right".  This
> is very arbitrary and isee-specific (similar with to_black).  I think
> there needs to be a place for isee to document the isee-specific
> values it recognizes in attribute values, but that might not be in the
> middle of the industry's spec.  Maybe we should have appendixes for
> vendor-specific values?
>
> yours,
> Bobby