RE: proposed changes to ACI chapter

Yes, to all other 6 similar elements in the ACI. 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lofton Henderson
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 2:14 PM
To: WebCGM WG
Subject: RE: proposed changes to ACI chapter

Thanks Benoit.

I will assume that you mean "agree" not only for lineJoin, but also the
same change for the other 6 similar elements in the ACI, as listed in
the message (lineCap, edgeCap, edgeJoin, edgeTypeCont, lineTypeCont,
restrTextType)

-Lofton.

t 02:05 PM 5/22/2009 -0400, Bezaire, Benoit wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I agree with the proposal, that is:
>
>-----
>Change the specification to:
>
><!ELEMENT lineJoin EMPTY >
><!ATTLIST lineJoin
>            lineJoinInd ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 ) #REQUIRED  >
>
>Regards,
>Benoit.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org
>[mailto:public-webcgm-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Lofton Henderson
>Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 10:53 AM
>To: WebCGM WG
>Subject: proposed changes to ACI chapter
>
>All--
>
>Action:
>-----
>Please reply on list to this message:  approve proposed changes; or 
>disapprove and state your reasons.
>
>What:
>-----
>Following the Wednesday telecon, Dave and a small quality verification 
>task team have looked at Ch.9, the ACI specification and its dtd.  The 
>good news is that it appears to be sound now.  However, the group 
>recommends some simple changes before 2nd LCWD review.
>
>Details:
>-----
>For seven elements under the (XML) defaultAttributes element, the (XML)

>attributes associated with the element are optional and a default is 
>given.  Consider for example the lineJoin ACI element [1]:
>
>[1]
>http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Con
>f
>ig.html#ACI-linejoin
>
><!ELEMENT lineJoin EMPTY >
><!ATTLIST lineJoin
>            lineJoinInd ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 ) "1"
>  >
>
>While this is not incorrect or illegal, strictly speaking, on the other

>hand it is not sensible when viewed from the perspective of the purpose

>of the defaultAttributes element.  For example, it would allow:
>
><lineJoin></lineJoin>
>
>and that construct would mean that the viewer should use the dtd's 
>default value for lineJoinInd, "1" ('unspecified'),  in rendering.  
>That value is in fact the CGM:1999 default value for the LINE JOIN 
>element, so the element is essentially an no-op.
>
>But  the ACI defaultAttributes element was added to webcgm precisely to

>tie down such underspecified values, and enable uniform viewer results 
>when dealing with the underspecified CGM:1999 defaults.  I.e., if 
>someone is putting a lineJoin element into the ACI file, then the goal 
>presumably is to nail down "unspecified" and tell the viewer to use a 
>particular one of the other 3 well-defined values (which are the legal 
>ways to handle "unspecified").  So the optionality and defaulting of 
>the lineJoinInd attribute does not make sense for this group of
elements.
>
>It makes more sense to require the lineJoinInd attribute whenever the 
>lineJoin element is present.
>
>Proposal:
>-----
>Change the specification to:
>
><!ELEMENT lineJoin EMPTY >
><!ATTLIST lineJoin
>            lineJoinInd ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 ) #REQUIRED  >
>
>If the ACI has a lineJoin element, it must have a lineJoinInd
attribute.
>
>This proposal would similarly be applied to:  lineCap, edgeCap, 
>lineJoin, edgeJoin, lineTypeCont, edgeTypeCont, restrTextType.
>
>Additional:
>-----
>Each of these elements also has something like this at the end of it
>definition:  "The default value is '1' or 'unspecified'."
>
>I would change these occurrences to:
>"Note (informative):  in the CGM:1999 specification, the default value 
>for the associated CGM LINE JOIN Attribute element is "1
(unspecified)."
>
>It would also be acceptable to simply delete them (speak up if you have

>a preference here.)
>
>Tests:
>-----
>No ACI tests are affected.
>
>Summary:
>-----
>Please reply with:  approval of this proposal; or, disapproval and your

>reasons.
>
>Regards,
>-Lofton.

Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 18:21:40 UTC