14:48:22 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #Forms
14:48:22 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-irc
14:50:42 <Schnitz> Nick, I think you're channel op
14:50:58 <Schnitz> Nick, could u set the topic to the agenda link?
14:51:00 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007May/0051.html
14:52:18 <Nick> Nick has changed the topic to: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007May/0051.html
14:54:25 <Schnitz> thanks
14:54:34 <jturner> jturner has joined #forms
14:54:41 <Schnitz> hi joern
14:54:46 <Schnitz> zakim, code
14:54:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'code', Schnitz
14:54:47 <jturner> Hi Schnitz
14:55:15 <Charlie> Charlie has joined #forms
14:55:52 <Schnitz> zakim, code?
14:55:52 <Zakim> the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Schnitz
14:55:54 <Zakim> HTML_Forms()11:00AM has now started
14:55:59 <Zakim> +[IBM]
14:56:07 <Charlie> zakim, [IBM is Charlie
14:56:07 <Zakim> +Charlie; got it
14:56:21 <Nick> Nick has joined #Forms
14:57:10 <Zakim> + +49.176.251.2.aaaa
14:57:35 <Schnitz> zakim, +49 is me
14:57:35 <Zakim> +Schnitz; got it
14:57:43 <Zakim> +Nick_van_den_Bleeken
14:58:00 <Rafael> Rafael has joined #forms
14:58:04 <Roger> Roger has joined #forms
14:58:17 <Roger> zakim, code?
14:58:17 <Zakim> the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Roger
14:59:13 <Zakim> +??P5
14:59:43 <jturner> zakim, P5 is me
14:59:43 <Zakim> sorry, jturner, I do not recognize a party named 'P5'
14:59:49 <Schnitz> zakim, ??p5 is jturner
14:59:49 <Zakim> +jturner; got it
14:59:50 <Nick> zakim +??P5 is jtuner
15:00:01 <Zakim> +??P8
15:00:17 <Roger> zakim, ??p8 is Roger
15:00:17 <Zakim> +Roger; got it
15:00:25 <jturner> zakim, mute me
15:00:25 <Zakim> jturner should now be muted
15:00:40 <Roger> zakim, Roger has Rafael
15:00:40 <Zakim> +Rafael; got it
15:01:07 <Zakim> +Susan_Borgrink
15:01:12 <John_Boyer> John_Boyer has joined #forms
15:01:47 <ebruchez> ebruchez has joined #forms
15:02:00 <Zakim> +??P27
15:02:29 <klotz> klotz has joined #forms
15:02:30 <ebruchez> zakim, ebruchez is ??P27
15:02:30 <Zakim> sorry, ebruchez, I do not recognize a party named 'ebruchez'
15:02:42 <ebruchez> zakim, ??P27 is ebruchez
15:02:42 <Zakim> +ebruchez; got it
15:02:58 <SusanB> SusanB has joined #forms
15:03:59 <Zakim> +Leigh_Klotz
15:05:15 <Schnitz> zakim, who is making noise?
15:05:27 <Nick> no one is makeing noise
15:05:34 <Zakim> Schnitz, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Charlie (3%), Schnitz (55%)
15:05:42 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007May/0051.html
15:06:05 <John_Boyer> where is rrsagent?
15:06:12 <John_Boyer> oh oops i see it
15:06:18 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, make log public
15:06:27 <John_Boyer> zakim, this will be forms
15:06:42 <Zakim> ok, John_Boyer, I see HTML_Forms()11:00AM already started
15:08:45 <unl> unl has joined #forms
15:10:44 <Zakim> +unl
15:14:06 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007May/0007.html
15:16:15 <Nick> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Group/2005/09/f2f/2005Sept08#topic17
15:16:29 <klotz> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Group/2005/09/f2f/2005Sept08
15:18:15 <unl> zakim, mute me
15:18:15 <Zakim> unl should now be muted
15:18:32 <John_Boyer> are you guys discussing iterate right now?
15:18:46 <klotz> yes, john.  sorry.  i will give you a link.
15:19:01 <John_Boyer> It does sound like a feature request that should have gone into future features but didn't
15:19:26 <klotz> http://xformstest.org/klotz/20070516.txt
15:19:49 <Schnitz> John, do u think we should include it today for 1.1?
15:19:55 <John_Boyer> No.
15:20:15 <Schnitz> John, so future stuff?
15:20:24 <John_Boyer> Yes
15:20:29 <John_Boyer> It creates a nodeset that
15:20:38 <John_Boyer> has to persist
15:20:46 <John_Boyer> during run of actions
15:20:49 <John_Boyer> that can include delete
15:20:53 <John_Boyer> this is where the problem comes in
15:21:00 <John_Boyer> and nobody wanted to write the spec for it
15:21:05 <John_Boyer> so it got dumped into 1.2
15:21:09 <Schnitz> ok
15:21:14 <Schnitz> moving on then...
15:21:16 <John_Boyer> we just didn't put it in future features
15:21:38 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007May/0003.html
15:21:40 <klotz> John_Boyer reload
15:22:09 <Schnitz> John, do you want to respond to that email then?
15:22:16 <John_Boyer> ok
15:22:21 <John_Boyer> yes
15:22:30 <Schnitz> thanks
15:23:10 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007May/0003.html
15:26:18 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Feb/0084.html 
15:26:25 <klotz> John_Boyer reload
15:29:21 <Schnitz> ebruchez
15:29:38 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Feb/0084.html
15:30:07 <klotz> John_Boyer reload
15:30:16 <ebruchez> I will type then
15:30:24 <ebruchez> just aking what you think the next step should be
15:30:36 <ebruchez> based on that February discussion
15:30:40 <ebruchez> ok
15:30:44 <ebruchez> sounds good
15:30:48 <ebruchez> can you add the action item?
15:30:52 <Schnitz> sure
15:30:56 <klotz> ACTION: Leigh Klotz to respond to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007May/0003.html with questions about how generic the use case is, request for more, point out that it requires an extension.
15:31:01 <klotz> ACTION: Erik to read and understand http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Feb/0084.html , contact Aaron Reed and Mark Birbeck, and report back to group.
15:31:20 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Apr/0042.html
15:32:11 <ebruchez> this one is just a syntactic suggestion
15:32:31 <ebruchez> it's probably something to suggest to whomever is in charge of XML Events
15:32:46 <Nick> shouldn't we address this to mark
15:33:09 <Nick> isn't it shane and markb
15:33:30 <ebruchez> I can send the suggestion to whomever is in charge
15:33:46 <John_Boyer> lol, isn't that markb?
15:34:24 <ebruchez> so the question would be whether the WG thinks we should ask for this to be in XML EVents
15:35:13 <John_Boyer> Well, I have just learned that from *some* countries, I can only use my calling card to call Canada, not the US.  India is one of those countries.  I just knew something like this would come up, hence the request for Sebastian to chair.
15:36:21 <klotz> John_Boyer reload
15:36:53 <ebruchez> the goal was to propose a simple syntax
15:36:56 <ebruchez> to achieve that
15:37:07 <ebruchez> yes it is possible now, but heavier to write
15:37:23 <ebruchez> and the idea of a space-separate list is already common:
15:37:27 <ebruchez> list of schemas
15:37:31 <ebruchez> list of classes,
15:37:54 <ebruchez> sounds good
15:38:17 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0057.html 
15:38:36 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0051.html 
15:38:36 <klotz> ACTION: Erik Bruchez to suggest requirement to share handlers via lighterweight syntax than ev:listener to Shane McCarron and Mark Birbeck.
15:39:13 <Nick> I find <listener event="event-type-1" handler="#handler"/> <listener event="event-type-2" handler="#handler"/> is quite simple
15:40:39 <klotz> ACTION: Leigh Klotz to read and report back on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0057.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0051.html
15:40:53 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-forms/2006JulSep/0161.html 
15:41:24 <Nick> no he sent regrets
15:43:17 <Nick> he means the e-mails sent to the editors list
15:43:25 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2006Dec/0062.html
15:43:25 <Nick> I guess
15:46:20 <John_Boyer> I believe the email typed above, or some variation of it, became a last call comment and could be dealt with there.
15:46:57 <ebruchez> basically, MK suggests a solution for adding XPath functions in XForms that minimizes clashes in the future
15:48:24 <John_Boyer> yes, I do think the fact that we don't at least have the choice of a ns qualified version of our functions is problematic, and fixing that would not be too hard, and I *think* it is a last call issue
15:48:41 <ebruchez> unfortunately I won't be at the f2f
15:48:47 <ebruchez> but I could call in for that particular discussion
15:48:47 <Schnitz> John, we think we should discuss this at the F2F
15:48:57 <ebruchez> yup
15:49:14 <John_Boyer> Yes, last call issues will be discussed there as well, so it seems we would get to it there either way
15:49:32 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-forms/2007JanMar/0053.html
15:50:21 <klotz> RESOLUTION: We discuss http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2006Dec/0062.html at the F2F and encourge Erik Bruchez to call in.
15:50:42 <ebruchez> the term "acceptable" is just not working here in the first place I think
15:51:48 <ebruchez> I have also submitted more comments regarding bindings in another email
15:52:15 <Schnitz> Schnitz has joined #forms
15:52:19 <ebruchez> I think that may entail a rework of the whole area
15:52:26 <John_Boyer> The section starts "Dynamic Dependencies" then says some are not acceptable, then it goes on to say that in particular there are problems with model binding expressions
15:52:27 <ebruchez> I mean the whole section about bindings
15:52:40 <ebruchez> trying to find the link
15:53:14 <ebruchez> well, following recent discussions on bindings with John in public-forms, I think we need to do some work there
15:53:16 <John_Boyer> It's certainly true that 7.4 eval context needed a full rewrite, so some surgery on 7.5 is conceivalbe
15:53:25 <Schnitz> ebruchez, what do u suggest, striking acceptable and/or reworking the sections?
15:54:07 <ebruchez> the thing is, any expression that returns a node-set is acceptable
15:54:14 <Schnitz> zakim, who is here?
15:54:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see Leigh_Klotz, unl (muted), Charlie, Schnitz, Nick_van_den_Bleeken (muted), jturner (muted), Roger, Susan_Borgrink, ebruchez
15:54:16 <Zakim> On IRC I see Schnitz, unl, SusanB, klotz, ebruchez, John_Boyer, Roger, Rafael, Nick, Charlie, jturner, RRSAgent, Zakim
15:54:18 <Zakim> Roger has Rafael
15:54:24 <ebruchez> it's just some are dynamic bindings, some are not
15:54:25 <John_Boyer> In the particular case of the word 'acceptable' it didn't grab me as being difficult to understand, so I haven't gone after a rewrite
15:54:35 <John_Boyer> By acceptable we mean that they won't work correctly
15:54:44 <ebruchez> but I don't understand it ;-)
15:54:53 <ebruchez> not by the standard meaning of "acceptable"
15:55:06 <John_Boyer> It's unacceptable that things don't work as you would expect
15:55:17 <ebruchez> then dynamic bindings are prohibited?
15:55:20 <John_Boyer> In a perfect union of xpath and xforms, ignoring algorithmic complexities
15:55:36 <ebruchez> if they are allowed, then they are acceptable
15:55:53 <ebruchez> either way we need a rewrite and to use a different term
15:55:54 <John_Boyer> they would work properly, but they don't.
15:56:07 <John_Boyer> we could use a different word than 'acceptable' as long as someone proposes one
15:56:10 <klotz> ok, moving on to next agenda item.
15:56:14 <Schnitz> moving on to
15:56:16 <Schnitz> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2006Feb/0001
15:56:19 <John_Boyer> that issue alone didn't inspire me to go off and rewrite the section though
15:56:22 <ebruchez> more than the word, we need to actaully explain what we mean
15:56:58 <ebruchez> it is an issue I think if even XForms experts don't understand how UI bindings work ;-)
15:57:36 <unl> zakim unmute me
15:57:44 <unl> zakim, unmute me
15:57:44 <Zakim> unl should no longer be muted
15:58:03 <John_Boyer> Ah yes, the inability to create dependencies problem...
15:58:25 <ebruchez> we take the first one too
15:58:29 <jturner> think so too
15:58:50 <Nick> didn't we talk about it at Palo Alto?
15:58:51 <John_Boyer> we do too.
15:58:53 <John_Boyer> yes we did
15:59:00 <Nick> can't find the minutes
15:59:06 <John_Boyer> it was acrimonious as I recall
15:59:17 <Nick> does anybody have a link to the minutes of palo alto?
15:59:33 <Schnitz> John, all take the first one, I think we can (re-)agree on this
15:59:39 <Nick> s/have a link/has a link/
15:59:44 <Schnitz> all means all implementations on the call today
15:59:48 <John_Boyer> that's because you don't have Mark and Raman there
15:59:52 <Schnitz> David is asking:
15:59:58 <Schnitz> I 
15:59:58 <Schnitz> believe the specification should state that for closed selections the 
15:59:58 <Schnitz> first matching item must be the one selected
16:00:00 <ebruchez> here is the link to my message to www-forms-editor regarding section 7
16:00:01 <ebruchez> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2007May/0006.html
16:00:16 <John_Boyer> They argued strongly that a "select1" should select multiple items if they match the value
16:00:23 <John_Boyer> because you're selecting one value
16:00:33 <John_Boyer> I thought it should select1 item
16:00:34 <Nick> I want to read the minutes first
16:00:49 <John_Boyer> but there are just enough wrong words in the spec that it can be read either way
16:01:03 <ebruchez> ah, visually select multiple
16:01:12 <Roger> thx & bye
16:01:14 <Nick> bye
16:01:16 <ebruchez> bye
16:01:18 <Zakim> -Leigh_Klotz
16:01:20 <Zakim> -Nick_van_den_Bleeken
16:01:21 <Zakim> -unl
16:01:22 <Zakim> -Roger
16:01:23 <Zakim> -Susan_Borgrink
16:01:25 <Zakim> -ebruchez
16:01:27 <jturner> bye
16:01:27 <Zakim> -Charlie
16:01:32 <Zakim> -Schnitz
16:01:34 <Zakim> -jturner
16:01:35 <Zakim> HTML_Forms()11:00AM has ended
16:01:37 <Zakim> Attendees were [IBM], Charlie, +49.176.251.2.aaaa, Schnitz, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, jturner, Rafael, Susan_Borgrink, ebruchez, Leigh_Klotz, unl
16:01:44 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, make minutes
16:01:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-minutes.html John_Boyer
16:01:55 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, bye
16:01:55 <RRSAgent> I see 4 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-actions.rdf :
16:01:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Leigh Klotz to respond to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007May/0003.html with questions about how generic the use case is, request for more, point out that it requires an extension. [1]
16:01:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-irc#T15-30-56
16:01:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Erik to read and understand http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Feb/0084.html , contact Aaron Reed and Mark Birbeck, and report back to group. [2]
16:01:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-irc#T15-31-01
16:01:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Erik Bruchez to suggest requirement to share handlers via lighterweight syntax than ev:listener to Shane McCarron and Mark Birbeck. [3]
16:01:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-irc#T15-38-36-1
16:01:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Leigh Klotz to read and report back on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0057.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2007Mar/0051.html [4]
16:01:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/16-Forms-irc#T15-40-39