- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:27:12 -0600
- To: Thierry Michel <tmichel@w3.org>,WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Hi Thierry, I have done a lot more work on http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/highlight-test/WebCGM21-DOM , and have more questions and comments. First, a global question: are we sure that this new21 markup will be acceptable to the people who are ruling on the WebCGM21 spec. acceptability for /TR/ (pubrules)? Second, if "yes": if we markup the whole document, should the SoTD say something? Details... a.) Okay. That markup (below) with the IDL blocks works. (Could apply it also to the ECMAScript chapter.) b.) I ran into problems again, trying to use the <div> approach on a group of rows in a table: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/highlight-test/WebCGM21-DOM#styleprop-table So I created a variant of the new21 style, called "new21-inline" and applied it to each <tr>. It omits the margins and borders. (It also works applying it to lists, as in the <ul> in the local TOC at the start of the chapter. But we don't necessarily have to markup that TOC stuff). Questions.... 1.) threshold question: here is a good threshold example. Search on 'grnode' in WebCGM21-DOM.html. In a dozen places, you'll find single-sentence clarifications of the attribute/method behavior if the node type is 'grnode'. This is not new functionality, but rather clarification of ambiguity that existed in WebCGM 2.0. The changes are referenced in the Change Log. Should they be highlighted? It seems to me that we should be careful to separate new functionality from editorial. improvements (like clarifications) to 2.0 functionality. Another such example is the new last paragraph to each of 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, clarifying 2.0 alpha transparency functionality: http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Concepts.html#webcgm_2_2_2 2.) deletions? I can't think right now whether there are any functional deletions, but I think there might be. It would probably be in the context of deprecation/obsoletion... 3.) Deprecation/obsoletion: things that are deprecated in one version migrate to obsolete in the next. Is that a new feature to be marked? http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Conf.html#webcgm_conformance_deprObs (Some of this might be easiest to discuss at the Thursday telecon.) -Lofton. At 10:05 AM 9/8/2008 +0200, Thierry Michel wrote: >Lofton Henderson wrote: >>Thierry, >>It is possible to find Valid markup, based on <span>: >>http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/highlight-test/WebCGM21-DOM-2nd.html#L5095 >> >>(I had to tag each line individually. Else they overlapped and obscured >>each other if I tagged 6 lines with one <span>.) > > >tag each line individually with <span>, the rendering is not too elegant. > >I would suggest following code: > ><td> > <pre>interface WebCGMAppStructure > ... > </pre> > > <div class="new21"> > <pre>WebCGMRect getObjectExtent(); > ... > </pre> > </div> ></td> > >see >http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/highlight-test/WebCGM21-DOM-3nd.html#L5095 > >which does validate. > > >TM. > > >
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2008 00:28:05 UTC