- From: Don <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 14:01:19 -0600
- To: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>, "Bezaire, Benoit" <bbezaire@ptc.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Lofton, > 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 believe we should use "the viewer's rectangle" to be consistent with terminology used in 3.2.4.3 where Move behavior is described. Don. > 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 20:02:25 UTC