Re: Can we be more concrete?
W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> Realized last night I forgot to associate the image map in my example with
> the image. I also forgot the coordinates. Oops. Below are the necessary
> At 08:42 PM 12/29/96 -0900, W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> ><!DOCTYPE CircuitRelations [
> > <!NOTATION ImageMap PUBLIC "-//DRMACRO//NOTATION My Image Map//EN" >
> > <!ELEMENT ImageMap (Area+) >
> > <!ATTLIST ImageMap
> image CDATA #REQUIRED
> > >
> > <!ELEMENT Area (#PCDATA) >
> > <!-- Content of area is displayable label for the area -->
> > <!ATTLIST Area
> > ID ID #REQUIRED
> > coords CDATA #REQUIRED
> > notation (imagemap) #FIXED "imagemap"
> <ImageMap image="http://www.ti.com/datasheets/XYZ/framcir.gif">
> <area id=area-1 coords="1,71,101,195">A bunch of transistors</area>
> <area id=area-2 coords="139,78,215,211">A bunch of nand gates</area>
> <area id=area-3 coords="225,79,320,207">Cache ROM</area>
Ok. You may need to specify an origin (upper left, lower left, etc.).
Now you have the sort of thing done in the systems I've seen with this
exception. The coordinates may not be in the calling document. They
may be part of the records of the image handler software. The calling
document may be calling a named region using a convention. For example,
a road map has border coordinates that divide the printed map into
say, two inch square regions (the two inch is relevant only to the
printing). The handling software may use this convention to impose a
grid dividing the map into a set of squares. The author "names" each
square (named location), and the image handler keeps the association
of name to pixel coordinates. What the calling document passes is
the name, perhaps the handler name, and a command string telling
the handler to open up at the image zoomed to that region.
Right now, to do this sort of thing, we keep two different sets of
independent links (e.g, structs). One for the image handler's
view of a document set; one for the SGML handler's document set.
What we need is for these to be one set.