DynamicFlow002

View: New views
2 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

DynamicFlow002

by Philippe Le Hegaret :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Hi Glenn,

In test DynamicFlow002 (and the specification as well), you use the
value
 in(word,jump) fill(1.0s) out(line,smooth) clear(break,0.3s)

however, the syntax for dynamic flow is
 <flowFunction>+ <flowIntervalFunction>*

which means the flow function out() needs to appear before fill:

in(word,jump) out(line,smooth) fill(1.0s) clear(break,0.3s)

Did you mean the syntax for dynamic flow to be

( <flowFunction> <flowIntervalFunction>* )+

instead?

Philippe



Re: DynamicFlow002

by Glenn Adams :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

I will change the example and test to adhere to the syntax spec. No need to change the syntax. Also, btw, I expect to make a change to the rollUp test after conferring with Geoff on that feature.

G.

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:01 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@...> wrote:
Hi Glenn,

In test DynamicFlow002 (and the specification as well), you use the
value
 in(word,jump) fill(1.0s) out(line,smooth) clear(break,0.3s)

however, the syntax for dynamic flow is
 <flowFunction>+ <flowIntervalFunction>*

which means the flow function out() needs to appear before fill:

in(word,jump) out(line,smooth) fill(1.0s) clear(break,0.3s)

Did you mean the syntax for dynamic flow to be

( <flowFunction> <flowIntervalFunction>* )+

instead?

Philippe