[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: InkML

• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: InkML
• From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter.Hunsberger@s...>
• Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 11:15:09 -0500
• Thread-index: AcNn8fiq37RQRh8dRC+DDAHaHBZ3dgADS5GQ
• Thread-topic: InkML

Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@i...> writes:
> 
> There is a granularity of identity issue there.  One does 
> not typically extract one face from an indexed face set 
> and use it elsewhere.  Maybe the same can be said for a 
> line segment or a single coordinate.  One can argue as 
> some will that meaningfulness is with the user and that 
> the format should enhance that to the maximum degree 
> possible.  On the other hand, coordinates, for example, 
> are seldom atomic as meaningful units except to the 
> renderer unless one is working in a geo system of 
> map coordinates where coordinates are paired with 
> meaningful names (think intersection of two 
> highways).  So in isolation, the decision to use 
> a number list makes sense.  When one considers 
> reuse in a different semantic system, the case can 
> be different.
> 
> How theoretical is this?  I don't know and maybe 
> it varies case by case, but it still seems odd to 
> me to have at least four XML languages with four 
> different dialects for coordinates.

Oh, great, now you've gone and given the W3C justification to create
another schema type: coordinate list...

<snip/>

• Prev by Date: RE: InkML
• Next by Date: Re: Binary XML == "spawn of the devil" ?
• Previous by thread: RE: InkML
• Next by thread: RE: InkML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread