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.