From A.M.Mumford@lut.ac.uk Fri Jul 28 12:53:19 1995 Received: from mailhost.lut.ac.uk (bgate.lut.ac.uk) by dkuug.dk with SMTP id AA16641 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4j for ); Fri, 28 Jul 1995 12:53:19 +0200 Received: by hpc.lut.ac.uk (15.11/SMI-4.1) id AA22159; Fri, 28 Jul 95 11:43:35 bst Message-Id: <9507281043.AA22159@hpc.lut.ac.uk> From: Anne Mumford Subject: CGM ISPs To: SC24@dkuug.dk, mcbroome@csn.org, 71302.417@CompuServe.Com, hattori@sysrap.cs.fujitsu.co.jp, moeller@fokus.gmd.de, egloff@deteberkom.detecon.d400.de, a.m.mumford@lut.ac.uk, lofton@ncar.ucar.edu, a.h.francis@open.ac.uk, hjkimn@gaya.kreonet.re.kr, lsr@nist.gov, inagaki@marsh.ntt.jp, andre.ducrot@inria.fr Date: Fri, 28 Jul 95 11:43:34 BST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0 (LUT)] X-Charset: ASCII X-Char-Esc: 29 At the Ottawa meeting we put together comments on the CGM ISPs which are about to go out for ballot as ISO/IEC 12071 parts 1-4 National bodies are encouraged to contact their committees who have responsibility for commenting on these ISPs to put in national comments from a graphics perspective. In order to assist, the comments put together at the meeting plus other comments which have come to me from graphics experts are given below Anne Mumford ***************************************************** SC24:N1407 Comments on CGM DISPs, ISO/IEC 12071 Parts 1-4 Note, these comments will be forwarded to ISO as comments from SC24 on the DISP ballots. Member bodies of SC24 are encouraged to comment along these lines and make any other comments on the ballots through their national bodies. Comments on all parts: 1 The final version of CGM/Am 1 should be used. 2 Any resolved defects should be reflected in the text 3 Clause 5 should include the fact that conformance relates to metafiles and generators and interpreters (not just to metafiles). 4 All instances of N/A (not applicable) should be replaced by the check box for prohibited being used. 5 Table 16.1, be specific about version numbers allowed. 6 Make a note at the start of the tables that the references within the tables are to CGM Am 1 document. 7 Change attachment 25.4 for each of the profiles with the correct information for each profile. 8 Change 25.3 to values appropriate for each profile (values from LRH). 9 Defect corrections should be marked up on the tables. 10 For elements such as line type (T.20.2), hatch index, edge type.... It would be better to check the 'Element is Permitted' and the values 1..5 box and leave all the other boxes blank. 11 For Line Width specification mode (et al) T.17.3 - add 'Only absolute or scaled is permitted' 12 T.19.7 - Add a minimum number of points (3) This would avoid some degeneracies. Comments on 12071-1 (FCG-BST) 1 Table 17.3, 17.4, 17.5 indicate there are no restrictions by adding "None" 2 Table 19.1 answer all questions including "None" - this is a general comment to be carried out where applicable. 3 Table 20.2, 20.24, 20.27 should be "permitted" and tick category for 1-6 allowed 4 Prohibit V3 attribute elements 5 Reference Am 1 Annex H in 24.4 6 T.16.2, for Colour Class and Source there is no entry for "Content". Should be "as Model). 7 T.16.9. The "upper bound" question is not answered. Should be "no" (or "as Model"). 8 T.17.2, .3, .4, .5. The restrictions listed are redundant with T.16.1, Metafile Version, at least formally speaking - they are imposed by the designation of V1 metafile. The question then is whether we wish to be helpful to the reader and implementor of the profile by including such "observe V1 restrictions" notes. 9 T.20.1, .5, .9, .26. Should have "as model" for "Allowable Index values". 10 T.20.22. Note that this is not done consistently with T.17.2, explicitly restricting to V1 subset. 11 T.20.24. "Same as Model" is only true within the constraints of V1 versus V3. But, formally speaking it is not necessary to draw this distinction probably. Should be done consistently however that question is resolved. 12 T.20.34. "same as model" is not correct. See T.16.9 for Greyscale (16, not 64). 13 Polygon set T.19.8 - '1024 points in the set' doesn't answer the question "Number of polygons in a set" . You need a number like, minimum=1, maximum = unlimited 14 T.16.9 - use '-' for the range (e.g., 0-255) Comments on 12071-2 (FCG-AST) 1 Table 17.3, 17.4, 17.5 indicate there are no restrictions by adding "None" 2 Table 17.6, check "same as Model" 3 Table 19.9 make nx and ny same as model 4 Table 20.2, 20.24, 20.27 should be "permitted" and tick category for 1-6 allowed 5 Table 20.32, check "permitted" 6 Prohibit V3 attribute elements 7 Reference Am 1 Annex H in 24.4 8 Cell Array T.19.9 - Need to put in values for nx and ny. What is 'Mon'? Comments on 12071-3 (FCG-BPV) 1 Table 19.9 needs to have an increased limit for nx*ny. The limits for nx and ny should be set to be the same. 2 Table 16.2, set the profile id to be FCG-BPV 3 Prohibit V3 attribute elements 4 Reference Am 1 Annex H in 24.4 Comments on 12071-4 (FCG-APV) 1 Table 19.9 needs to have an increased limit for nx*ny. The limits for nx and ny should be set to be the same. 2 Table 16.13, remove Hershey font, add the metrics for the Adobe 35 which go beyond the Adobe 13 already specified in the Model Profile. 3 Table 16.3 is not complete - add "permitted" and "no" 4 Table 19.8, number of polygons in the set should be set to "No Limit" 5 Table 19.9 make nx and ny same as model 6 Table 24.4 - need to note Annex H of Am 1 and also font metric information which is not the same as the Model. Reference to a new Annex with the extra metrics in which itself then references Annex H.