[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com> 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/>
|
