- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:16:43 -0700
- To: David Cruikshank <dvdcruikshank@gmail.com>
- Cc: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20090119165625.0358aea0@localhost>
At 02:49 PM 1/19/2009 -0800, David Cruikshank wrote: >On the other hand there isn't any analogous value for raster >intensity...so it has to return the intensity value that was set. Right. But I don't see that as a problem, since there is only one mode for setting raster intensity. Responding to your initial idea, I think there is some logic to returning the value in the mode that corresponds to how the CGM:1999 attributes are expressed. But wait! It is not as simple as it looks: stroke-weight SP: NVDC or % [as a multiplier on current line/edge widths] LINE/EDGE WIDTH cgm attribute: VDC, or MM, or ScaleFactor (times impl-dependent "nominal"), or % (of VDC extent). The APS content in the metafile could have the line/edge width in one of 4 Specification Modes, and it would seem that you would have to select VDC/NVDC arbitrarily as the "canonical" mode. But the stroke-weight % option might present a wrinkle that determines the answer of this issue. Consider this example. BegAPS; line width 5mm; polyline; line width 10mm; polyline; EndAPS If a DOM call sets stroke-weight to 10mm, then both polylines are 10mm. But if it sets stroke-weight to 200%, then the first polyline is 10mm and the second is 20mm. In the latter case, getSP('stroke-weight') could NOT return an NVDC value that was meaningful, right? So I think the answer to the issue needs to be: return it in the mode in which it was set (or "empty string" if the SP was never set). Does anyone see a way around this conclusion, that does not involve a bunch of weird rules and tedious calculations? Regards, -Lofton. >On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:38 PM, David Cruikshank ><<mailto:dvdcruikshank@gmail.com>dvdcruikshank@gmail.com> wrote: >>Just shooting from the hip here, but I would expect the return value to >>correspond to the common value of the attribute in CGM. We introduced >>these "intensity" or percentage values WebCGM, but for simplicity I think >>the return should probably be the value that makes sense when you >>consider the same attribute value in CGM. >> >>Just my thoughts. >> >>Dave >> >> >>On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Lofton Henderson >><<mailto:lofton@rockynet.com>lofton@rockynet.com> wrote: >>>ISSUE: does getStyleProperty have to return the SP in the same form in >>>which it was set? >>> >>>Ref: >>><http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009Jan/0005.html>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2009Jan/0005.html >>> >>>Discussion: Benoit asks the simple question, which we apparently have >>>never addressed... >>> >>>At 10:59 AM 1/7/2009 -0500, Bezaire, Benoit wrote: >>>>[....] I wonder if the implementation has to return the exact same >>>>string that was used to set the attribute. >>>> >>>>Example for stroke-weight: setStyleProperty("stroke-weight", "200%"), >>>>getStyleProperty("stroke-weight") returns 0.5 (assuming original was 0.25). >>> >>>Question 1: do any of our past minutes or email address this? >>> >>>Question 2: has anyone implemented yet? What have you implemented? >>> >>>RECOMMENDATION: (none yet.) >>> >>>### end ###
Received on Tuesday, 20 January 2009 00:17:52 UTC