Chapter 3 review

All,

I haven't had a chance yet to read Dieter's and Ulrich's comments, so some
of mine might duplicate what has already been said. I used Amaya to edit the
HTML and flagged my changes with the .editorial style. I'll summarize and
make additional comments in the body of this message.

Section 3.1.1.1

I removed "Objects" from the second sentence.  It is given a different
definition later in this chapter.

RFC 3986 was referred to as RFC-3986 (hyphen) and RFC3986 (run together) in
this chapter.  I prefer "RFC 3986" (space); this is the style used in the
RFCs themselves.

Section 3.1.1.3

This section is very difficult to read.  I had to read it several times to
digest it.

'xcfurl' wasn't mentioned in the first sentence.  Is this a bug or a
feature?  I assume it is a bug.

Rule number 2 does only one thing, it eliminates NUL from the character
repertoire.  T.14.5 already eliminates all of the C0 control characters
except for NUL, so applying this rule only serves to eliminate NUL.  T.14.5
could be modified to prohibit NUL, and this rule would be unnecessary.
Interestingly, neither T.14.5 or rule number 2 say anything about the C1
control characters, they are allowed (with presumably undefined effects) the
way this is currently written.

Rule 3 -  objname, removed #x09, #x0a, and #x0d from the whitespace
definition, they are disallowed by T.14.5

Rule 3 - picid, contains this: ".... further restrictions: as objid for any
picid value occurrences within a fragment ...."  Isn't the whole point of
this section to define the character repertoire of the WebCGM fragment?
Shouldn't this be worded identically to the "objid" part with the exception
of the WebCGM element (Begin Picture versus Begin APS) that it corresponds
to?

See highlighted changes in the last two paragraphs.

Section 3.1.1.4

See highlighted changes.

Section 3.1.1.5

See highlighted change.

Section 3.1.2 first paragraph.

Summary is at the end of this subsection.

Section 3.1.2.2

In the middle of this section is the following statement: "CGM viewers shall
ignore picture behavior specifications in URI fragments which are part of
links from non-CGM content."  I'm curious, how does the CGM viewer know the
source of a link?

Section 3.1.2.4.1

See highlighted changes.

Section 3.1.2.4.2

See highlighted change.

Section 3.1.2.6

See highlighted change.

Section 3.1.2.7

See highlighted change.

Summary table, CGM-to-CGM row, picBehavior column, has "deprecated: picTerm
...".  If this is deprecated, shouldn't it be removed from the table?  Also,
the link navigates to linkuri, just like the "preferred" link.

Section 3.2.1.1

See highlighted changes in the first paragraph. APSA type is case-sensitive,
right?

See highlighted changes in the example paragraph in the middle of this
section.  Also this paragraph says "... the event will be "passed on for
hyperlink processing." ...." and then goes on to give a specific example
without mentioning which event we are talking about.  Judging from the
description, I'd say it is a click event.

There are a couple more highlighted changes in this section.

Section 3.2.1.2

See highlighted change.

Section 3.2.1.4

See highlighted change.

Section 3.2.1.5

See highlighted change.

Section 3.2.2.1

See highlighted change.

Section 3.2.2.3

See highlighted changes in the third, fourth, and fifth paragraphs.

I do not understand the second bullet item in the example.  How can a
CGM-to-HTML link contain a WebCGM fragment?

Section 3.2.2.6

See highlighted change.

Section 3.2.2.9

A 'layer' cannot be a "descendant object" can it?

Section 3.2.2.10

Same comment on layer as above.  Neither this section or the previous
section gives a description of what the value "inherit" means.  The values
of "off" and "on" are intuitively obvious, but what about "inherit"?  In
fact, I could not find a description of this anywhere in Chapter 3.

Section 3.3

See highlighted change in the comment section of the DTD.

The very last link in this section, 3.2.2.10, apparently targets a
non-existent anchor.  Nothing happened when I clicked on it.

Section 3.4

See highlighted changes.

Changed script type in the example to "application/ecmascript."  The
"text/ecmascript" MIME type is deprecated.

Added space characters around the "|" character for clarity.

The viewport paragraph mentions "the IT attribute."  I do not know what this
is.  I could not find such an attribute in the HTML 4.01 Specification.

The mapping paragraph is a bit terse.  It defines "Fit" and then "Fill" and
then goes into the default values without discussing halign or valign.


Rob


 <<WebCGM20-IC_review.html>>