- From: Lofton Henderson <lofton@rockynet.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 11:13:22 -0700
- To: bbezaire@ptc.com
- Cc: public-webcgm@w3.org
Dear Benoit, The WebCGM Working Group has reviewed the comment you sent [1] about the WebCGM 2.1 Last Call Working Draft [2] published on 02 October 2008. Thank you for having taken the time to review the document and send us comments. The Working Group's response resolution to your comment is included below. Please review it carefully and acknowledge this WebCGM WG response by replying to this mail and copying the WebCGM public mailing list <public-webcgm@w3.org>. Let us know if you agree with it or not before 11 Jan 2009. If we receive no reply from you by January 11, then we will default your reply to "WebCGM WG response accepted." In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during the transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation Track. Best regards, On behalf of the WebCGM Working Group, Lofton Henderson, WebCGM WG Chair. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Oct/0000.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-webcgm21-20080917/ _____________________________________________________________ * Comment Sent: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 * Archived: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Oct/0000.html The WebCGM WG has the following responses to your comment: ---------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY of your comment: >union() is not a good method name. Given that 'union' is a C/C++ keyword, >it cannot get compiled by the MIDL compiler (on Windows).We need a new >name. Either:i) Union(): but we have so far, started method names using >lower cap characters.ii) calcUnion() or getUnion(): or something similar. > >Follow-on comment: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webcgm-wg/2008Nov/0060.html > >"Don proposed 'unionRect()'. I'm fine with that. [...] Benoit" RESPONSE to your comment: >Change the method name 'union()' to 'unionRect()', as proposed. Changes >will be made in: 5.7.1.2, 5.7.5 (setView), and Ch.8 (ECMAScript). --------------------------- end -------------------------------
Received on Thursday, 18 December 2008 18:14:15 UTC