[X3D-Public] containerField is should or must ?
Johannes Behr
johannes.behr at igd.fraunhofer.de
Wed Aug 4 06:52:24 PDT 2010
Hi,
we have some issues with xml/x3d-content and got it down to a basic spec-question:
If we have content like this:
<Shape >
<Box containerField='foo' >
...
</Box>
</Shape>
There is no 'foo'-field in Shape and therefore the containerField='foo' assignment fails.
What should happen in this case? Should the Shape fall-back to the normal behavior and
put the Box in geometry or should the parser stop with an error?
Is the containerField an should-go-there or must-go-there ?
the related spec link I have found:
http://www.web3d.org/x3d/specifications/ISO-IEC-19776-1.2-X3DEncodings-XML/Part01/concepts.html#ContainerFieldAttributeSyntax
best regards,
johannes
More information about the X3D-Public
mailing list