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

Re: LC comments summary

From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 08:10:41 -0700
Message-Id: <>
To: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>
Cc: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>

At 09:46 AM 11/6/2008 +0100, Thierry Michel wrote:
>Lofton Henderson wrote:
>>All --
>>Here is a compendium of LC Review comments for WebCGM 2.1.  We received 4 
>>comments altogether, all of which came from the CGM community.
>>We have recorded two of 'em here:
>>[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/03/WebCGM21-LC-comments.html
>Actually there are 4 comments listed.
>- two are recorded as "Formal comments"
>- and two more are listed as "should we include these as Formal comments"
>getObjectExtent() and gzip-compression

Yes, sorry.  I prepared that message in haste before running out for 
another commitment.

>Maybe we should discuss this at the telecon.


Experience predicts that we will have more as the implementations 
advance.  The main effect we are seeing here is that the 2.1 Process (in 
W3C) is ahead of the implementation work and test suite completion.  These 
latter two are always our main source of comments.

So in the telecon we should have a closer look at when these can be 
expected, and whether we ought to adjust our W3C processing plan at all.


>>1.) SF limit should be bigger:
>>[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/03/WebCGM21-LC-comments.html#Issue1
>>[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm/2008Sep/0001.html
>>2.) Name of the WebCGMRect::union method is problematic:
>>[4] http://www.w3.org/2008/10/03/WebCGM21-LC-comments.html#Issue2
>>[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Oct/0000.html
>>And there are two more that are not yet recorded in [1]
>>3.) Wording clarification for getObjectExtent():
>>[6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Oct/0015.html
>>4.) Scope of normativity of gzip-compression requirement:
>>[7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Oct/0020.html
Received on Thursday, 6 November 2008 15:15:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:23:40 UTC