W3C | Submissions

Team Comment on WebCGM 2.0 Submission


W3C is pleased to receive the WebCGM 2.0 Submission submission from Oasis.

This submission externalizes non-graphical data to an XML companion file, which allows standard XML technologies to be applied in the creation, modification and consumption of this data. It also allows re-use of CGM assets with different companion files, avoiding needless revision of the CGM itself and thus aiding version management.

This submission also adds a DOM API to WebCGM. This is not intended for modifying the graphical content. Instead it focuses on tree traversal, style changes, and providing access to metadata.

Licensing Terms

W3C notes that, besides the Submitter and the listed authors who offer licenses according to W3C RF Patent Policy, the other contributors to the Submission license their contributions under the OASIS IPR policy "RF w/Limited Terms". Development of this specification in W3C would be under the W3C RF Patent Policy.

This Member Submission is related to the previous W3C work on WebCGM 1.0, and draws on experiences with that format from implementors and users over five years. WebCGM has established itself in the industrial, long-lived technical documentation space, although it has not has found widespread use outside that niche. WebCGM 2.0 provides the benefits of increased functionality and maintainability to that established base.

This Member Submission is also related to W3C work on SVG. Both are languages for describing vector, or mixed vector and raster, graphics. They differ in the degree of graphical richness, the extent of DOM manipulation possible, and the target audience; SVG being used in graphic arts, cartography, on mobile, and for rich Web applications.

Next Steps

The next step will be an Activity Proposal for a new Working Group in the Graphics Activity. If this proposal is approved and gathers a critical mass of developers and implementors, this Working Group would be chartered to take the Submission through W3C Last Call and Candidate Recommendation phases. This would provide the benefits of wide review, including Accessibility and Internationalization review; documented implementability, and Royalty Free status.

Author: Chris Lilley