Lofton,
there is one more change that I want to
suggest:
3.1.1.3. Fragment Character Repertoire
Note that these character repertoires allow one or
more of the characters ".", ",", "(", and ")". These are significant characters
in the syntax of the WebCGM fragment specification. If any of these four
significant characters is to appear in a valid id/name string within a fragment
instance, then the fragment shall use the unabbreviated long form, which is the
first of the five optional forms in the 'webcgmfragment' production of 3.1.1.2.
Change to:
Note that these character repertoires allow one or
more of the characters ".", ",", "(", and ")". These are significant characters
in the syntax of the WebCGM fragment specification. If any of these four
significant characters is to appear in a valid id/name string within a fragment
instance, then the fragment shall use the unabbreviated long form
with all optional parts spelled
out, which is the first of the five optional forms in the
'webcgmfragment' production of 3.1.1.2.
I think it is necessary to add this because
otherwise it is not always possible to parse the fragment
correctly.
Dieter
