- From: Don <dlarson@cgmlarson.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:31:03 -0600
- To: "Bezaire, Benoit" <bbezaire@ptc.com>, WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
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 Wednesday, 19 November 2008 15:31:44 UTC