Re: SPEC - Description field in WWWAnchor

Neophytos Iacovou ([email protected])
Tue, 18 Apr 1995 00:44:41 -0500 (CDT)


James Waldrop writes:
>
> >FILE FORMAT/DEFAULTS
> > WWWAnchor {
> > name "" # SFString
> > description "" # SFString
> > map NONE # SFEnum
> > }
> If you don't specify the description, it should work the "old" way.
> Beyond that it seems nice.

I agree.

One thing to keep in mind though. If the URL points to an item in an
info system, chances are that the info system will be able to provide
an abstract for the given item (and if one is available).

if this is the case, what should be shown to the user? the description
provided by VRML or the abstract of the item? Seems to be that the
person who put the item up on the net to begin with has a better idea
of what the abstract should be than I. Would the description in the
above case be ignored in favor of the already existing abstract?

example:

WWWAnchor {
name "<URL:----------------->"
description "dog"
}

The URL is some object on an info system, and has the abstract "a bulldog"

What is more correct to display to the user?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neophytos Iacovou Distributed Computing Services
University of Minnesota 100 Union St. SE
email: [email protected] Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA