W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > December 2008

re[2]: Question about setView()

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:36:26 -0700
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20081204122208.02d62548@localhost>
To: Don <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>,"Bezaire, Benoit" <bbezaire@ptc.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>

Benoit or Don (or anyone) --

We have resolved this in concept -- yes, need to specify it.  I was 
entering it into the DoC and stumbled with wording.  Would one of you 
please send me some precise wording for [1]?

Taking off from Ben & Don suggestions, I started like this:  "The viewer 
shall fit the contents of the requested viewRect into >....what?....< and 
center it, while maintaining the aspect ratio of the viewRect."

It is the "....what?..." that I'm searching for.  Is it simply "viewer's 
rectangle" as in the (below) quoted zoom wording?  Or something more 
precise, like "view surface metafile display area"?  Or what?

I seem to recall some discussion of this once, but can't find it now.  (We 
were playing with words like viewport, viewWindow, etc, for what is now 
viewRect?)

Regards,
-Lofton.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-webcgm21-20080917/WebCGM21-DOM.html#setView


At 09:31 AM 11/19/2008 -0600, Don wrote:

>Benoit
>
>  >  I think some wording like the 'zoom' object behavior would  be 
> sufficient:
>  >
>  >  zoom The viewer shall fit the target  rectangle of the 
> selected  object(s)
>  >  into the viewer's rectangle and center it.
>
>I think that would be adequate if we add "while maintaining the aspect 
>ratio of..."
>
>  >
>  >  Benoit
>  >
>  >
>  >  From: Lofton Henderson  [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
>  >  Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:20  PM
>  >  To: Bezaire, Benoit; WebCGM WG
>  >  Subject: RE: Question  about setView()
>
>  >
>  >  At 11:51 AM 11/18/2008 -0500, Bezaire, Benoit wrote:
>  >  Also, there is nothing in the wording explaining how to handle view
>  >  rectangles which have a different aspect ratio than the viewer's 
> viewport.
>  >  Which will happen in 99% of the cases.
>  >  Good point.   I raised this myself some time back, and it got lost before
>  >  any  resolution.
>
>  >  There is some guidance in the stuff of section 3.4,  where we have 
> <param>s
>  >  that specify mapping, halign, valign of the picture  into the <object>'s
>  >  rectangle.  I think something similar is  reasonable here.
>  >  (Alternatively, if we don't want the mapping options, we  have to specify
>  >  how it happens unambiguously.)
>
>  >  -Lofton.
>
>
>  >  From: public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org
>  >  [mailto:public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of  Bezaire, Benoit
>  >  Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:58  AM
>  >  To: WebCGM WG
>  >  Subject: Question about  setView()
>
>  >  I'm wondering if the wording  of setView() is not a bit short? The draft
>  >  doesn't say anything about invalid  rectangles being passed in for
>  >  example.
>  >
>  >  Should more feedback be sent to the user? Currently, the function
>  >  prototype has a void return type. Should we change that to a boolean or
>  >  something else? or throw an exception perhaps.
>  >
>  >  I also question the possibility of a major scale change, ex:  scaling 
> in by
>  >  a factor of 100 (and loosing sight of the overall picture).  Should the
>  >  user be told that such a change occurred?
>  >
>  >  Thoughts?
>  >  Benoit.
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2008 19:37:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 4 December 2008 19:37:19 GMT