- From: Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:58:43 -0400
- To: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
I don't really like the sentence: "This is the default behavior for such links." What does _such links_ refer to? It's confusing. What not say something like: "This is the default behavior for CGM-to-CGM links." It doesn't prevent CGM-to-SVG links (or vice versa), if such implementation exists. Also, I find the first sentence _very_ confusing: "The viewer shall replace the current CGM picture by the designated CGM picture same rectangular area in the same frame as the picture which refers to this target." I think only a handful of people can understand that sentence; maybe I'm stupid. Is that what is meant: "The viewer shall replace in the same frame and same rectangular area of current CGM picture by the linked content." (This is easier for me to understand). I agree that all of this is editorial, all intentions remain the same. Benoit. Tuesday, October 24, 2006, 7:15:19 PM, Lofton Henderson wrote: > [...changing list to the WG list, for discussion...] > This topic will be on the telecon agenda for Thursday. Please feel free to > discuss on this list in advance. > Chris notes that the last sentence of WebCGM's discussion of the "_replace" > picture behavior ignores that SVG also supports this value. His suggested > solution is to delete the first part of the last sentence, which would leave... > [[[ > _replace > The viewer shall replace the current CGM picture by the designated CGM > picture same rectangular area in the same frame as the picture > which refers to this target. If the ending resource (CGM) is the same as > the linking resource, the viewer does not reload the resource. This is the > default behavior for such links. > ]]] > On the one hand, I agree with Chris that it is editorially inaccurate (or > ambiguous) as worded. The word "applicable" is the problem, IMO. As Chris > interpreted it, in the broadest sense, indeed "_replace" is also applicable > to C2S and S2C links (and S2S), not just C2C links. On the other hand, one > could claim that we were thinking of "applicable" from the perspective of > required (conformance) capabilities of WebCGM 2.0 viewers, and therefore > its use could be defensible from that perspective. > My opinion, bottom line -- the imprecision of the word argues for the > removal of that phrase. I would also venture that we did not intend to > *mandate* WebCGM 2.0 viewer support of anything other than C2C links, i.e., > the mandatory WebCGM 2.0 viewer capability is unchanged from WebCGM > 1.0. So whatever change we make should not imply any changed conformance > requirements. > So ... thoughts? Does Chris's proposed change satisfy everyone? And > equally importantly, is everyone satisfied that it is editorial? (Anything > other than editorial is awkward / inadmissible, at PR stage!) > -Lofton. > At 04:38 PM 10/20/2006 +0200, Chris Lilley wrote: >>Hello public-webcgm, >> >>In picture behaviours: >> >>http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PR-webcgm20-20061017/WebCGM20-IC.html#webcgm_3_1_2_2 >> >>_replace >> The viewer shall replace the current CGM picture by the designated >> CGM picture same rectangular area in the same frame as the picture >> which refers to this target. If the ending resource (CGM) is the >> same as the linking resource, the viewer does not reload the >> resource. Applicable only to CGM-to-CGM links, this is the default >> behavior for such links. >> >>The last sentence is incorrect; since SVG also has an _replace value, >>then this value will apply to WebCGM-to-SVG links (and the corresponding >>value in SVG will apply to SVG-to-WebCGM links). >> >>Suggested change: >> >>s/Applicable only to CGM-to-CGM links, this/This/ >> >>I believe that this is an editorial change and that this error is due to >>an oversight. In WebCGM 1,0, it was true that HTML did not have the >>value and thus WebCGM 1.0 was the only spec that had it. This has not >>been true since SVG 1.0 added the same value as WebCGM has. >> >>-- >> Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org >> Interaction Domain Leader >> Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group >> W3C Graphics Activity Lead >> Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Thursday, 26 October 2006 14:58:18 UTC