IRC log of forms on 2008-02-04

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:10:12 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #forms
14:10:12 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-irc
14:10:20 [Steven]
rrsagent, make log public
14:10:54 [Steven]
Meeting: Forms WG FtF Raleigh NC USA, Day 1
14:11:00 [Steven]
Chair: John Boyer
14:11:22 [Steven-eee]
Steven-eee has joined #forms
14:12:05 [unl]
leigh, xmpp not xml
14:12:45 [klotz]
Yes, but they bill it in the article as "a generalized XML routing system" so they know it's not just free chat.
14:14:01 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has joined #forms
14:15:00 [unl]
xmpp is even used in some esb implementations as a messaging protocol
14:15:20 [John_Boyer]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Agenda_Feb._4%2C_2008
14:15:33 [John_Boyer]
John_Boyer has changed the topic to: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Agenda_Feb._4%2C_2008
14:19:50 [John_Boyer]
scribe: CharlieW
14:20:38 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Default trigger
14:21:33 [CharlieW]
John: continuing from Friday's discussion, try to get to high priorities for 1.2
14:21:37 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Agenda_Feb._4%2C_2008
14:21:52 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Default_trigger
14:22:07 [shepazu]
Zakim, call Forms-f2f
14:22:07 [Zakim]
ok, shepazu; the call is being made
14:22:08 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has left #forms
14:22:08 [Zakim]
+Forms
14:22:09 [CharlieW]
John: added some more explanation to the wiki
14:22:15 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has joined #forms
14:22:15 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has left #forms
14:22:23 [CharlieW]
John: with examples for defaulting behavior
14:22:55 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has joined #forms
14:23:18 [CharlieW]
John: based on Mark's comments that a group might have several inputs and DOMActivate one the event will bubble to group level
14:23:34 [CharlieW]
John: we might capture that event and reflect it back to the default submission control in that group
14:23:41 [Steven]
Steven has joined #forms
14:23:43 [CharlieW]
John: which would then of course cause another round of bubbling
14:23:50 [CharlieW]
John: in an infinite loop
14:24:18 [CharlieW]
John: so we don't have a reasonable way to generalize a UI control as default to be activated from other controls in a group
14:24:43 [CharlieW]
John: rather than dispatch, if you do a send you don't get a loop
14:24:48 [CharlieW]
Charlie: why is this?
14:25:18 [CharlieW]
Nick: if you dispatch the event to the action you don't get a problem
14:25:26 [CharlieW]
John: unless the trigger does a stoppropagage
14:25:33 [CharlieW]
Nick: you can use your own event
14:25:42 [CharlieW]
John: not generalizeable
14:26:03 [CharlieW]
John: if you actually press the trigger as a user, you'll get a DOMActivate
14:26:23 [CharlieW]
John: but as the default control, use a *different* event -- this seems wierd to do twice
14:27:34 [CharlieW]
Nick: you can code the action to fire only on the custom event and it will work in both cases
14:27:58 [CharlieW]
Mark: we want a convenient authoring notation
14:28:21 [CharlieW]
Mark: and we haven't been precise about which events are generated from each control...
14:28:43 [CharlieW]
John: up to now we have no exceptions to events based on target object -- don't modify XML events
14:29:10 [CharlieW]
Mark: doesn't break XML events to spec out the behavior for stop propagation etc by control
14:29:32 [CharlieW]
Mark: e.g. for submit behavior
14:30:04 [CharlieW]
John: but in general for all triggers would be hard to say they stop propagation
14:30:32 [CharlieW]
Mark: could define new markup for trigger that captures this behavior
14:30:45 [CharlieW]
John: we still have a problem just to define default behavior for triggering
14:30:55 [CharlieW]
John: in 1.1 now
14:31:15 [CharlieW]
John: you're suggesting that unless we add more markup, we won't have a good solution to default triggers
14:31:20 [CharlieW]
Mark: yes, but we should do that anyway
14:32:07 [CharlieW]
John: supposing we do that (tidy up DOMActivate story)...result might be we'd be able to create a default action or UI control in a group using some elaborate pile of markup but it would work
14:32:32 [CharlieW]
John: I'm wondering suppose we do this, could we then see how to encode an ease of authoring shortcut to default triggers
14:32:48 [CharlieW]
Mark: shorthand would be a new attribute on trigger or submit, i'm the default
14:32:54 [CharlieW]
John: that's what I was hoping for
14:33:06 [CharlieW]
Mark: but we should do the tidy-up firsthand
14:33:47 [klotz]
s/english/English
14:33:58 [CharlieW]
john: proposal is to solve the default problem in two phases --
14:34:06 [CharlieW]
John: get markup precision (cleanup)
14:34:18 [CharlieW]
John: phase two is to create the short-hand, along lines of default attribute
14:35:09 [CharlieW]
Mark: XML Events 2 has an action to stop propagation
14:35:19 [CharlieW]
Nick: if you have that, does our current markup work?
14:35:45 [CharlieW]
Mark: yes, but it would be awkward to code
14:35:50 [CharlieW]
John: that's the XML Events 2 advantage
14:35:59 [CharlieW]
Nick: but then you could do it with our markup
14:36:04 [CharlieW]
it would require XML Events 2
14:36:46 [CharlieW]
Nick: there are use cases where you want to propagate DOMActivate
14:37:09 [CharlieW]
John: you'd have to put stoppropagate on every trigger in the group
14:37:29 [CharlieW]
Mark: i don't see use cases with handler both on the trigger and you want to bubble
14:37:48 [CharlieW]
Nick: default actions for all triggers
14:37:59 [CharlieW]
Steven: i've needed it once for value-changed, but not DOMActivate
14:38:22 [CharlieW]
Mark: but trigger is a funny case
14:38:46 [CharlieW]
Mark: always follows same pattern, trigger ev:event="DOMActivate"...you've said this twice in effect
14:39:38 [CharlieW]
Nick: but then you'd have trouble controlling whether to stop propagation explicitly
14:40:03 [CharlieW]
Mark: better inside the trigger to set data up, then do a send
14:40:22 [CharlieW]
Mark: better to do both in the same block rather than depending on another handler working together
14:41:35 [CharlieW]
Mark: could have a designated "handler" for when the trigger is actually pressed
14:42:03 [CharlieW]
Mark: e.g. onActivate as a child of trigger
14:42:58 [CharlieW]
John: is anybody willing to champion this? carry it forward to authoring shorthand too...
14:44:07 [CharlieW]
John: sign me up for 1.2
14:44:55 [John_Boyer]
Solve default trigger problem for 1.2 by coming up with better DOMActivate behavior and then creating the ease of authoring shorthand
14:48:36 [CharlieW]
ACTION: John_Boyer to solve default trigger problem for 1.2 by coming up with better DOMActivate behavior and then creating the ease of authoring shorthand
14:48:36 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, couldn't find user - John_Boyer
14:49:24 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Put_ref_or_context_on_action_element
14:49:40 [CharlieW]
Topic: Put ref or context on action element
14:49:54 [CharlieW]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Put_ref_or_context_on_action_element
14:50:12 [CharlieW]
John: in order to set context for a repeated set of actions, avoiding need to code it on each action
14:50:25 [CharlieW]
Mark: is this different from context everywhere?
14:50:43 [CharlieW]
Nick: i wrote some spec for context on bind
14:50:58 [CharlieW]
John: but i thought we weren't doing this, rather make child elements out of calculate, readonly, etc and put context there
14:51:14 [CharlieW]
John: i wrote this up in an email
14:51:47 [CharlieW]
John: back to this item, regardless of context everywhere (there was concern in 1.1 about doing this)...
14:52:11 [CharlieW]
John: was concern that a global context would be hard to understand -- too powerful
14:52:20 [CharlieW]
Mark: in 1.1 i think that was fair
14:52:35 [CharlieW]
Mark: if some elements support it and some don't that's perhaps more confusing
14:53:07 [CharlieW]
Steven: and the code says it explicitly
14:53:33 [CharlieW]
john: i like generally putting context everywhere
14:53:54 [CharlieW]
Steven: my experience is doing it partly, we miss good usecases
14:54:11 [CharlieW]
Steven: if it's harmless, we should put it everywhere
14:54:24 [CharlieW]
John: could be confusing if you expect it to work, and it's missing somewhere
14:54:41 [CharlieW]
John: we've seen this in practice
14:54:44 [CharlieW]
Uli: what about repeat?
14:54:55 [CharlieW]
John: repeat is perhaps the most important target
14:55:43 [CharlieW]
Mark: so there's a good consistency, model attribute, maybe instance attribute, ref, context
14:55:54 [CharlieW]
Mark: they all work the same way all the way through
14:56:03 [CharlieW]
John: could be defined once in the spec
14:56:44 [CharlieW]
John: one perhaps confusing thing is we're not saying what happens to the insides of a repeat
14:56:56 [CharlieW]
John: does expressing the context attribute cause a change to the context size and position
14:57:24 [CharlieW]
Mark: if you say ref is shorthand for context=x, ref=.
14:57:34 [CharlieW]
Mark: then context means same as ref without binding aspect for events
14:57:46 [CharlieW]
Mark: ref is shorthand for both
14:58:00 [CharlieW]
John: so yes it does reset position and size
14:58:08 [CharlieW]
John: which appears to make sense
14:58:42 [markbirbeck]
I.e., we should 'read history backwards', so that <group ref="x"> is a shorthand for <group context="x" ref="."> and then write up @context accordingly.
14:58:51 [CharlieW]
John: within UI binding you lose track of which row you're on if you can't call position and size
14:59:15 [CharlieW]
John: if you have an input inside a repeat then the ref attribute during evaluation you can invoke position and size functions
14:59:25 [CharlieW]
John: to figure out what row you're on and how but the containing repeat is
14:59:43 [CharlieW]
John: whereas with context attribute you lose this by the time you evaluate the ref...still have it for context
14:59:48 [CharlieW]
Mark: so it's not backwards compatible
14:59:58 [CharlieW]
John: but it'd be ok if you move the expression to context
15:01:37 [CharlieW]
Nick: ...
15:01:42 [CharlieW]
John: not a problem
15:04:10 [CharlieW]
John: anybody interested in championing putting context everywhere and removing it as special attribute?
15:04:21 [CharlieW]
Leigh: so what does context on instance do?
15:04:29 [CharlieW]
John: nothing
15:04:32 [CharlieW]
Leigh: ok
15:04:51 [CharlieW]
John: so we're being imprecise...put context everywhere where we can currently put nodeset or single node binding
15:05:19 [CharlieW]
john: those sections of chapter 3...where we'd list context attribute
15:05:45 [CharlieW]
John: amend 7.2, insert/delete,
15:05:55 [CharlieW]
Mark: would be easier to make all of those attribute to apply everywhere
15:06:19 [CharlieW]
Mark: so why not put them on model, would set context for nested handlers
15:06:22 [CharlieW]
John: grrrr
15:06:33 [CharlieW]
John: but with nested models might make sense...
15:07:03 [CharlieW]
Mark: almost like context is implied on the model, on submission context already has implied first instance
15:07:35 [CharlieW]
John: there are in fact only a few elements that don't have some form of binding
15:07:44 [CharlieW]
John: and allow them to still set a context
15:07:46 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:07:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-minutes.html Steven
15:08:25 [CharlieW]
Nick: what about host language elements?
15:09:06 [CharlieW]
John: that seems to be a separate problem, we haven't address well...applying xforms UI bindings on host language elements
15:09:17 [Steven]
Present: Charlie, Doug Schepers - W3C, Uli, Steven, Mark B, John B, Keith, Nick
15:09:18 [CharlieW]
John: would seem to require global namespace versions of our attributes
15:09:33 [CharlieW]
John: e.g. putting ref on svg elements, rather than xf:ref
15:09:33 [Steven]
Present+Leigh
15:11:50 [CharlieW]
John: concern about putting context everywhere was more about being toward the end of doing 1.1
15:11:57 [CharlieW]
John: rather than a concern in principle
15:12:09 [CharlieW]
john: it's now in the list of 1.2 possible features
15:12:33 [CharlieW]
John: so we could pick it up and move it forward
15:12:41 [CharlieW]
Uli: i can do this
15:13:16 [CharlieW]
ACTION: Uli to work on context "pretty much everywhere (see the minutes)
15:13:16 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Uli
15:14:00 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:14:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-minutes.html Steven
15:14:34 [Steven]
hand
15:15:06 [Steven]
shorthand
15:15:34 [Steven]
firsthand
15:15:36 [shepazu]
Zakim, q?
15:15:36 [Zakim]
I see Steven, short, first on the speaker queue
15:17:19 [Steven]
you've got to hand it to zakim, that that is a really interesting bug
15:17:26 [Steven]
q=
15:17:33 [Steven]
queue=
15:18:09 [Steven]
hand it to zakim that he says the funniest things
15:18:26 [Steven]
hand it to that bot he has interesting bugs
15:18:40 [Steven]
you've got to hand it to zakim
15:21:13 [Steven]
hand it to zakim
15:21:19 [Steven]
hand it to him
15:21:37 [Steven]
the bot knows no shorthand
15:21:50 [Steven]
to the bot knows no shorthand
15:22:52 [shepazu]
handy
15:23:02 [unl]
handsome
15:23:13 [unl]
handler
15:23:14 [shepazu]
unhand me!
15:23:14 [Steven]
a glass of shandy
15:23:29 [Steven]
secondhand
15:24:32 [Steven]
q-
15:24:35 [CharlieW]
Topic: Proposal to let value override single node binding on output
15:24:38 [Steven]
q- second
15:24:51 [CharlieW]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/%40value_override_single_node_binding_on_output
15:25:17 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/%40value_override_single_node_binding_on_output
15:25:33 [John_Boyer]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2006Aug/0009.html
15:26:41 [CharlieW]
John: when you use ref now it ignores the value
15:26:59 [CharlieW]
John: when you want the ref to get the MIPs but override the value from the ref with the value xpath
15:27:07 [CharlieW]
Leigh: seems like a hack to me, why not use XBL?
15:27:10 [CharlieW]
John: say more...
15:27:17 [CharlieW]
Steven: may not have XBL
15:27:47 [CharlieW]
Mark: when doing RDFa, found it's easier to define how all attributes work together, rather than overrides etc etc
15:28:01 [CharlieW]
Mark: example seems nice
15:28:32 [CharlieW]
Leigh: so approaching the same result but from different use case?
15:29:12 [CharlieW]
Leigh: applying behavior generally
15:29:17 [CharlieW]
Mark: yes, makes rules uniform
15:29:27 [CharlieW]
John: so add value to input?
15:29:30 [CharlieW]
Mark: no, don't add value
15:29:46 [CharlieW]
Mark: take Uli's context example, do something like this for value/ref
15:30:02 [CharlieW]
Leigh: i could see adding value to this story with context/ref
15:30:13 [CharlieW]
Leigh: just worried about doing this one example as a special case
15:30:40 [CharlieW]
Mark: agree with that
15:31:18 [CharlieW]
Leigh: if there's a separate reason for doing this, ok...but this specific example is not compelling on its own
15:31:49 [CharlieW]
John: but we are still only talking about value on output...not general case
15:31:55 [CharlieW]
John: where else is value used?
15:32:35 [CharlieW]
Leigh: following this specific use case could get into too many special cases
15:32:45 [CharlieW]
John: there are other cases, for example value inside item
15:33:02 [CharlieW]
Leigh: can you put value on label?
15:33:09 [CharlieW]
John: no, but output inside label with a value
15:34:35 [CharlieW]
Mark: agree with Leigh...this is looking for a formatting type thing...
15:34:45 [CharlieW]
Mark: but i'm interested in the consistency of our attribute combinations
15:35:06 [CharlieW]
Leigh: we should do it if there are reasons beyond this case
15:35:30 [CharlieW]
John: there are authoring convenience issues...wrapping a group around output is not convenient
15:35:56 [CharlieW]
Leigh: repeat with group to get relevance loses context
15:36:04 [CharlieW]
John: lose position and size
15:36:15 [CharlieW]
John: our new context attribute doesn't fix that
15:36:36 [CharlieW]
Mark: it would if ref were on the same level as context
15:36:50 [CharlieW]
John: context already means something other than that for insert/delete in 1.1
15:38:13 [CharlieW]
Mark: this is the result of not doing context everywhere at first
15:38:20 [CharlieW]
Mark: consistently
15:38:34 [CharlieW]
John: seemed to be needed to control behavior of attributes on that element, as well as children
15:39:30 [CharlieW]
John: seems consensus is to not accept this as a special case
15:39:41 [CharlieW]
Mark: i like the general issue it raises, but deal with it consistently
15:41:23 [CharlieW]
Mark: could do this by putting a label with value under output
15:41:30 [CharlieW]
John: group trick would be just as good
15:41:37 [CharlieW]
Mark: but then handlers have to go on group
15:42:43 [CharlieW]
Leigh: the point of this proposal is that he'd like it to be a single control for styling...doing a group makes this hard
15:43:10 [CharlieW]
John: i'm still hearing we should not do this now, put in bucket for potential later issues...
15:43:32 [Steven]
Regrets: Mark S, Erik, Sebastian, Roger
15:43:56 [CharlieW]
John: just feel that value attribute is used in too many different ways to easily create the general solution
15:44:10 [CharlieW]
Mark: but we don't need to go there, just where ref and value are on same element
15:44:14 [CharlieW]
John: eg. setvalue
15:46:40 [CharlieW]
RESOLUTION: table putting value and ref together to later issue
15:46:55 [CharlieW]
John: do we need to respond by mail...
15:47:24 [CharlieW]
Doug: yes
15:48:31 [CharlieW]
John: we could put this into the general case of formatting issues...
15:49:00 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#ui-selection-commonelems-value
15:52:29 [CharlieW]
John: do we want to consider better support in XForms 2.0 for formatting values?
15:52:35 [CharlieW]
seems like a host language/skinning issue
15:53:01 [CharlieW]
John: might require knowledge of the application context
15:53:23 [CharlieW]
Mark: there's no standard way of doing this
15:53:33 [CharlieW]
Steven: CSS isn't quite strong enough, should we do this or somewhere else?
15:53:37 [CharlieW]
Leigh: e.g. XBL
15:54:36 [CharlieW]
Mark: there are lots of platform-specific ways to do this, won't be interoperable
15:55:45 [CharlieW]
Steven: should be class="currency" then the formatting layer takes over...
15:56:16 [CharlieW]
Doug: could provide a service to convert to the desired currency...
15:56:41 [CharlieW]
Steven: would help in adapting to locale and user...e.g. Euros vs Dollars
15:57:27 [CharlieW]
Mark: could just open an issue in the wiki and work on it there
15:57:43 [CharlieW]
Keith: doesn't XSL formatting objects help here>?
15:58:13 [CharlieW]
Mark: all we need is an attribute the formats the output
15:58:21 [CharlieW]
s/the/that
15:58:49 [CharlieW]
Steven: it's an issue, even if XForms isn't the right layer to address it...we should ack the issue
15:59:22 [CharlieW]
Mark: there seems to be a functional issue too...controlling the precision that stuff gets into the data layer
16:01:13 [CharlieW]
seems like controlling transforms from data layer to UI is separate problem from concrete presentation styling
16:03:02 [CharlieW]
Steven: seems like it's value-add for user agents to do extra processing for known data types, not all platforms might be able to do this
16:03:18 [CharlieW]
Steven: nothing prevents you from having an input control that knows it's an integer-only
16:03:57 [CharlieW]
John: have created an entry in wiki for considering formatting for UI controls, and have added this issue to that page
16:11:12 [wellsk]
scribe: wellsk
16:15:42 [wellsk]
Starting back
16:15:49 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
16:16:10 [wellsk]
John: other 1.2 possible features
16:16:40 [wellsk]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Create_Node
16:17:01 [wellsk]
John: can't create node out of thin air
16:17:17 [wellsk]
Mark: make part of insert element
16:17:17 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Create Node capability
16:17:25 [nick]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Agenda_Feb._4%2C_2008
16:17:45 [nick]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Create_Node
16:19:58 [wellsk]
Mark: recreating xaml here, express attribute or express element
16:20:52 [wellsk]
Mark: if generalize would it need value element, origin element, origin element with value, origin element with children
16:21:09 [wellsk]
Mark: origin element with ref
16:21:20 [wellsk]
Nick: like a nodeset
16:21:48 [wellsk]
John: wouldn't use nodeset
16:22:02 [wellsk]
Charlie: shallow vs deep in subtree
16:22:32 [wellsk]
John: Create Node, here is name, here is node -- only thing missing right now
16:22:49 [wellsk]
Leigh: element and attribute from xslt and nest them to make trees
16:23:15 [wellsk]
Charlie: not recreate DOM interface
16:23:43 [wellsk]
John: not sure we need this
16:24:16 [wellsk]
Mark: ability to compartentalize, template, model for templates, reuse them
16:24:54 [wellsk]
Nick: from xslt, if know name - make subtree with dynamic and static names
16:25:05 [wellsk]
nick: not just use element
16:25:07 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Create_Node
16:25:41 [wellsk]
John: insertion and setting of value
16:25:56 [wellsk]
John: if name of element could be dynamically specified?
16:26:15 [John_Boyer]
<create ref="parent" nodetype="element" name="child">literal</create>
16:26:22 [wellsk]
John: use literal value (string) of create element
16:26:42 [wellsk]
Mark: attribute called value or content
16:26:54 [wellsk]
John: children or attributes of this element
16:27:15 [wellsk]
Mark: if xpath don't need children
16:27:35 [klotz]
<xf:create ref="parent"><xf:element name="child"><xf:attribute name="att">123</xf:attribute><my:thing>in my namespace is literal</my:thing></xf:element></xf:create>
16:27:36 [wellsk]
Mark: create a dynamic element like xslt
16:28:32 [wellsk]
Mark: transform action, previously discussed with David L.
16:28:50 [wellsk]
John: have to have xslt processor
16:28:58 [wellsk]
John: not good for phone people
16:29:25 [wellsk]
Nick: need to create subtrees, usually a subtree not just one element
16:29:31 [markbirbeck]
s/previously discussed with David L./previously proposed by David L. on exforms./
16:30:48 [wellsk]
John: 1.2 to facilitate authoring, is this much to ask?
16:31:04 [wellsk]
Nick: solve it in complete package not simple one
16:31:18 [wellsk]
John: action to fix simple cases
16:31:30 [wellsk]
John: with action to fix in 2.0
16:32:02 [wellsk]
Nick: import xforms element, not allow subtrees to be created
16:32:11 [wellsk]
Leigh: what's problem with subtrees
16:32:56 [wellsk]
Leigh: use value element and single node bindings
16:33:22 [wellsk]
John: Nick has been saying to drive data for name of the element
16:33:27 [klotz]
<xf:element name="'child'" >
16:33:54 [klotz]
<my:child>
16:34:07 [wellsk]
Nick: not use element
16:34:18 [wellsk]
Mark: why new create when we have insert
16:35:07 [wellsk]
Nick: add origin child of insert and add arbitrary elements, to create dynamic attributes
16:35:54 [wellsk]
John: Why not add origin child element to insert, come up to actions with well-known patterns
16:36:09 [wellsk]
Nick: need general solution with simplier form
16:36:37 [wellsk]
John: allow to control names of elements
16:36:51 [wellsk]
John: question of spelling insert or create
16:37:17 [wellsk]
Mark: setvalue instead of just a string, set value of XML
16:37:32 [wellsk]
Mark: value is of type XML
16:37:59 [wellsk]
Mark: if string value is an element add XML
16:39:05 [wellsk]
Mark: instead of string value, <setvalue ref="some/node">John</setvalue>
16:39:45 [wellsk]
John: value is synonymous with string value
16:40:20 [wellsk]
Mark: value could be xml content
16:41:24 [wellsk]
John: interpretation of value has been equal to string, not content
16:41:46 [wellsk]
Mark: interpretation doesn't have to be string
16:42:10 [wellsk]
Mark: what do you mean by value, doesn't mean a string necessarily
16:42:55 [wellsk]
John: can't calculate arbitrary xml
16:43:22 [wellsk]
Mark: not disagreing, did not see value is perceived only as a string
16:43:43 [wellsk]
John: call it setcontent
16:44:00 [wellsk]
John: as opposed to setvalue
16:44:37 [wellsk]
Mark: processor to figure out rebuild flag if xml content
16:45:17 [wellsk]
John: the value attribute converts to string
16:45:40 [wellsk]
Nick: value as renedered by form control
16:46:02 [wellsk]
John: insert, create or setcontent
16:46:52 [wellsk]
John: insert always sets the rebuild flag
16:47:05 [wellsk]
John: is setcontent reasonable
16:47:10 [wellsk]
Mark: i don't mind
16:47:22 [klotz]
copy?
16:47:55 [wellsk]
Nick: origin child of insert?
16:48:28 [wellsk]
John: a new action with added intelligence
16:49:05 [wellsk]
Mark: are situations where don't need rebuild
16:49:26 [wellsk]
Nick: Are spelling out in spec ?
16:50:04 [wellsk]
Nick: if implementation decides not necessary to do rebuilds, inconsistent behavior.
16:50:22 [wellsk]
Nick: do something other than caceling
16:50:34 [wellsk]
s/caceling/canceling/
16:51:12 [wellsk]
John: insert by nature of adding origin to insert, insert could be intelligent to do rebuild too
16:51:26 [wellsk]
John: setcontent as a ease of authoring
16:51:40 [wellsk]
Nick: to champion this
16:52:24 [Steven]
rrsagent, here?
16:52:24 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-irc#T16-52-24
16:52:27 [wellsk]
Nick: will change the 1.2 features list wording of create
16:53:04 [wellsk]
Steven: this points into log
16:53:17 [wellsk]
Nick: wants to point to minutes
16:55:37 [John_Boyer]
time for lunch
16:57:29 [Zakim]
-Leigh_Klotz
16:58:57 [klotz]
klotz has joined #forms
17:06:01 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Forms, in Team_(forms)14:01Z
17:06:03 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)14:01Z has ended
17:06:04 [Zakim]
Attendees were Leigh_Klotz, Forms
17:25:12 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #forms
17:39:47 [ebruchez]
ebruchez has joined #forms
17:50:26 [markbirbeck]
markbirbeck has joined #forms
17:55:37 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #forms
17:55:44 [Steven]
zakim, hello
17:55:44 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'hello', Steven
17:55:55 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
17:56:03 [Steven]
zakim, reserved now?
17:56:03 [Zakim]
on Mon Feb 4 12:56:00 2008 I see 20 reserved [72 available], 5 ports 30 minutes later [87 available], and 5 ports 60 minutes later [87 available]
18:00:43 [Steven-eee]
zakim, room for 4 for 300 mins?
18:00:45 [Zakim]
ok, Steven-eee; conference Team_(forms)18:00Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 300 minutes until 2300Z
18:01:05 [Steven-eee]
zakim, dial forms-FTF
18:01:05 [Zakim]
I am sorry, Steven-eee; I do not know a number for forms-FTF
18:01:19 [wellsk]
Forms-f2f
18:01:33 [Steven-eee]
zakim, dial Forms-f2f
18:01:33 [Zakim]
ok, Steven-eee; the call is being made
18:01:34 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has now started
18:01:34 [Zakim]
+Forms
18:02:10 [CharlieW]
CharlieW has joined #forms
18:02:10 [Steven-eee]
zakim, drop Forms
18:02:10 [Zakim]
Forms is being disconnected
18:02:12 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has ended
18:02:13 [Zakim]
Attendees were Forms
18:02:20 [Steven-eee]
zakim, dial Forms-f2f
18:02:20 [Zakim]
ok, Steven-eee; the call is being made
18:02:21 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has now started
18:02:22 [Zakim]
+Forms
18:02:39 [wellsk]
re from Doug: Zakim, call Forms-f2f
18:03:13 [Steven-eee]
zakim, drop forms
18:03:13 [Zakim]
Forms is being disconnected
18:03:15 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has ended
18:03:16 [Zakim]
Attendees were Forms
18:03:21 [Steven-eee]
zakim, dial Forms-f2f
18:03:21 [Zakim]
ok, Steven-eee; the call is being made
18:03:22 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has now started
18:03:23 [Zakim]
+Forms
18:06:14 [nick]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Create_Node
18:08:11 [wellsk]
Leigh, are you dialed back yet?
18:09:27 [Steven]
klotz
18:09:35 [Steven]
zakim, who is here?
18:09:35 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Forms
18:09:36 [Zakim]
On IRC I see CharlieW, unl, Zakim, markbirbeck, ebruchez, klotz, Steven, Steven-eee, RRSAgent, John_Boyer, nick, wellsk, trackbot-ng
18:11:05 [wellsk]
zakim, code?
18:11:05 [Zakim]
the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), wellsk
18:11:05 [steeeven]
zakim, code?
18:11:07 [Zakim]
the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), steeeven
18:13:14 [steeeven]
steeeven has left #forms
18:14:25 [steeeven]
who
18:14:52 [Zakim]
+??P0
18:14:58 [Zakim]
-??P0
18:16:18 [wellsk]
eric, we are dialed in to conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), steeeven
18:16:29 [Steven]
ebruchez?
18:16:30 [wellsk]
Scribe, wellsk
18:16:41 [wellsk]
Scribe: wellsk
18:17:11 [wellsk]
topic: specific actions instead of insery
18:17:24 [wellsk]
s/insery/insert/
18:18:14 [wellsk]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Specific_actions_instead_of_general_insert
18:18:49 [wellsk]
Mark: not certain a priority
18:19:05 [steeeven]
steeeven has joined #forms
18:19:29 [ebruchez]
hi I am around, will call in soon
18:19:33 [wellsk]
Mark: a last call comment, is insert too complicated, destroy and duplicate issues
18:19:41 [nick]
rssagent, make minutes
18:19:52 [wellsk]
Mark: at that time, hesitant adding more to insert
18:20:16 [steeeven]
steeeven has left #forms
18:20:21 [wellsk]
John: stabilized secondary behaviors of insert
18:20:29 [steeeven]
steeeven has joined #forms
18:21:01 [nick]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:21:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-minutes.html nick
18:21:07 [wellsk]
John: create, duplicate, destroy -- all possible but insert/delete handle these general cases
18:21:45 [John_Boyer]
We standardized on insert in part to control the eventing
18:22:03 [John_Boyer]
it'll always be xforms-insert, even if we use a 'duplicate' or 'setcontent' action now
18:22:38 [wellsk]
John: should we break out different behaviors on insert into 1.2
18:22:59 [wellsk]
Steve: if it is too hard (insert) we should do it.
18:23:09 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#insert-delete-patterns
18:23:26 [wellsk]
Mark: Cherry pick the simple things, should we create a new action
18:23:31 [klotz]
zakim, what is the code
18:23:31 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'what is the code', klotz
18:23:33 [klotz]
zakim, what is the code|?
18:23:33 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, klotz.
18:23:49 [wellsk]
zakim, code?
18:23:49 [Zakim]
the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), wellsk
18:23:55 [klotz]
thanks
18:24:03 [Zakim]
+??P0
18:24:08 [ebruchez]
zakim, ??P0 is ebruchez
18:24:08 [Zakim]
+ebruchez; got it
18:24:36 [Zakim]
+Leigh_Klotz
18:25:04 [wellsk]
Steven: insert/delete reflect a hole in our constraints processing which may be better described in declarative way
18:26:25 [ebruchez]
hi guys, FYI the sound quality is pretty bad
18:26:47 [ebruchez]
it doesn't seem like the mike is picking up the speakers well
18:27:36 [Zakim]
-Leigh_Klotz
18:27:49 [Zakim]
+Leigh_Klotz
18:29:43 [wellsk]
Mark: different things for simplification, shortcut actions, or think of common things people do in forms
18:29:58 [wellsk]
Mark: thinking of more elaborate actions
18:30:14 [wellsk]
Mark: repeat of insert/delete -- very common
18:31:09 [wellsk]
Steven: work for 1.2, 2.0 has room for big improvement
18:32:07 [wellsk]
Mark: making some thing really easy for simplification, or taking mathemitician's viewpoint and doing all things
18:34:01 [wellsk]
Charlie: external source attribute reusing generic web service model
18:34:24 [wellsk]
John: big ticket items?
18:35:08 [wellsk]
John: simplified repeat in XForms in 2.0 -- leave there?
18:35:29 [wellsk]
Charlie: patterns around repeat -- almost every form application
18:35:46 [wellsk]
Mark: when do comples, becomes memory hungry on processor
18:36:57 [wellsk]
Mark: if thousands of items, repeat processes thousands, or use 10 items and use code to bring in other pieces of the 1000's of items
18:38:31 [wellsk]
Mark: you could show how they should be done
18:38:47 [wellsk]
Mark: deal with large lists of data, have given examples
18:39:19 [wellsk]
Mark: or say number=x in repeat, then add more in language itself to deal with these cases
18:39:28 [wellsk]
Charlie: that is the case from experience
18:39:36 [wellsk]
Charlie: simplified notation
18:40:24 [wellsk]
Mark: Rails has done very well, but do not find suddenly a performance problem, but have run in to performance problem in xforms
18:40:36 [nick]
nick has joined #forms
18:40:41 [wellsk]
John: repeat may be too light weight
18:41:02 [wellsk]
John: by default get 10 row table
18:41:35 [wellsk]
John: setting defaults and have markup for the poor performance cases
18:41:42 [markbirbeck]
http://www.formsplayer.com/node/346
18:42:07 [wellsk]
Mark: can we turn that into a piece of markup
18:42:27 [ebruchez]
just FYI it seems that the sound is hopeless :-(
18:42:44 [wellsk]
Mark: how you feel you should work it, vs best performance pattern
18:42:46 [ebruchez]
will follow the IRC logs though
18:43:10 [wellsk]
Mark: key is on bind not repeat
18:43:46 [wellsk]
Mark: list of items from page, nodeset = 10 items, 20 items, and then it's manipulating nodeset
18:43:49 [klotz]
i put the xforms-scroll-* events on repeat to allow you to retrieve partial data for display, but afaik nobody has made it work yet
18:44:49 [wellsk]
Mark: solved problem in action handler
18:45:44 [wellsk]
Mark: key thing of this, 4 compoents: instance data, nodeset on windo of data, action handlers by page size
18:46:01 [wellsk]
s/compoents/components/
18:46:46 [wellsk]
Mark: my-prev-page, and my-next-page
18:47:29 [wellsk]
Mark: gets a nodeset for repeat, triggers dispatch events, next page, previous page - shows view of data
18:48:16 [wellsk]
Steven: looking at nodeset and want to show a bunch in a repeat
18:48:40 [wellsk]
John: How does delete operate in repeat
18:48:52 [wellsk]
Mark: number is only a hint
18:49:11 [wellsk]
Steven: not seeing difference in two things
18:49:49 [wellsk]
John: can't manipulate attributes for repeat
18:50:25 [wellsk]
John: write delete for current row, @index-of-repeat
18:50:54 [wellsk]
Mark: number is hint and as you move up/down, row index to data is moved into view
18:51:14 [wellsk]
Mark: so have to set index on that solution
18:51:44 [wellsk]
Mark: have to add index to view index, implementation specific
18:52:00 [wellsk]
Nick: we can decide one way, make portable
18:52:25 [wellsk]
John: setindex action called for many reasons, an implicit setindex now to get row focused.
18:52:47 [wellsk]
Charlie: model on left, events to control refresh on server, build logic around it
18:52:57 [wellsk]
Mark: independent of repeat
18:53:16 [wellsk]
Mark: just a block of data as you scroll, independent of UI
18:53:37 [wellsk]
Charlie: pattern repeat/insert/delete and client/server pattern
18:53:53 [wellsk]
Charlie, like this because it is consistent with declarative lang.
18:54:16 [wellsk]
s/Charlie,/Charlie:/
18:55:21 [wellsk]
John: index is between 1-5 only, because that is what is showing. (in a repeat of large numbers)
18:55:48 [wellsk]
John: memory on server 10,000 nodeset, when you really need a 5 item nodeset to view
18:56:03 [wellsk]
Uli: typical problem on Chiba
18:56:38 [wellsk]
Mark: on mobile env, could go to server every single request, window size is one page
18:57:20 [wellsk]
Nick: parse complete DOM, you can optimize it, when doing large docs...
18:57:44 [wellsk]
Mark: can do this now, a new author sees quite a lot going on and writes inefficient forms
18:58:06 [wellsk]
Nick: implementors not solving the performance issue
18:58:25 [wellsk]
Nick: Dom is in memory to work through it
18:58:37 [wellsk]
Nick: not as easy in implementation
18:59:02 [wellsk]
Mark: where are you getting information from 20 items or thousand items
18:59:36 [wellsk]
Mark: repeat number="20", bind="x", <bind nodeset="x"/>
18:59:49 [ebruchez]
I have trouble following the conversation, but when you have large information sets and you want to page through them it seems like a good idea to rely on a backend like a database to get smaller increments of data at a time. Sorry to state the obvious ;-)
19:00:05 [wellsk]
Mark: <insert bind="x" at "7000"/>
19:00:49 [wellsk]
John: disconnect between the number and bind element refed
19:01:03 [wellsk]
John: no firm attachment in repeat
19:01:24 [ebruchez]
maybe the issue is to have 10000 items in a nodeset in the first place
19:01:27 [wellsk]
John: how to optimize from 10,000 items to a few
19:01:51 [wellsk]
Charlie: how to provide simplified authoring
19:02:17 [wellsk]
John: look at common patterns, and then provide markup for them
19:03:02 [wellsk]
Leigh: index change and rebuild get server to provide caching
19:03:40 [wellsk]
MarK: window on a window, window on server
19:03:59 [wellsk]
s/MarK/Mark/
19:04:28 [wellsk]
Leigh: keeping offset in bind, don't limit to data when 10,000 nodeset is in model
19:04:39 [wellsk]
Leigh: when knows what offset is
19:05:14 [wellsk]
Leigh: xforms-scroll-up/xforms-scroll down was added to solve this
19:05:34 [wellsk]
John: inside data in model, go get more data to look at
19:05:56 [wellsk]
Mark: Ui <-> Server
19:06:31 [ebruchez]
I agree with Leigh. I think you will hit more use cases where the large dataset is external and where you don't want to load it entirely in memory. So if improvements are done in this area, it is important to keep these use cases in mind as well, in fact maybe those should be the primary use cases considered.
19:06:34 [wellsk]
Mark: window object in middle, receiver with event handlers, firer of events
19:07:19 [wellsk]
John: refs and submissions on how to get more stuff on top or on bottom, caching from server
19:07:32 [wellsk]
Mark: ADO style
19:08:35 [wellsk]
John: original topic, crakc insert yo do these common patterns
19:08:38 [unl]
lets call it grid
19:08:42 [unl]
not grits
19:08:58 [wellsk]
s/crakc/crack/
19:09:51 [wellsk]
John: special case, chuck if on it, add general case for insert to drive behavior looking for. not convinced if a dozen other insert oriented patterns
19:10:03 [wellsk]
John: is that Xforms 1.2 or 2.0
19:10:12 [wellsk]
Charlie: it's xforms 1.2
19:10:29 [wellsk]
John: rule of three, 2 is too little, 4 is too much
19:11:35 [wellsk]
John: this is third big hit, 1) nested modelling, 2)implied modeling, 3) class of these common patterns
19:11:59 [wellsk]
Charlie: doable but complex, now to boil them down
19:13:28 [wellsk]
John: concept is a value-add
19:13:46 [wellsk]
Charlie: wizards pattern
19:13:54 [wellsk]
John: higher use pattern
19:14:07 [wellsk]
John: valiudation over subtree of data
19:14:21 [wellsk]
s/valiudation/validation/
19:14:36 [wellsk]
John: to coimmunicate this is a wizard
19:14:58 [wellsk]
John: end up with arequirements doc
19:15:40 [wellsk]
John: need document, last call, working draft with 1.2, then people are asking for more ...
19:16:11 [wellsk]
John: breaking insert into pieces: are we going to defer?
19:16:28 [wellsk]
Mark: cherry pick some of them, 2-3 become candidates
19:16:51 [wellsk]
Mark: may find we have done most later
19:17:17 [wellsk]
John: may not need to list action, cause sematics say certain actions are done
19:18:00 [wellsk]
s/sematics/semantics/
19:20:49 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features
19:20:56 [wellsk]
John: xforms 1.2 only has two bullet points
19:21:08 [wellsk]
John: simplification and ease of authoring
19:21:16 [wellsk]
John: neither may be correct
19:21:26 [wellsk]
John: sales job for xforms 1.2
19:21:41 [wellsk]
John: what should it say for these buckets
19:24:02 [wellsk]
John: Ease of Authoring - making model optional, instance implied
19:24:53 [wellsk]
John: unified evaluation context - because calculate on UI control, means have control of context of expression
19:25:41 [wellsk]
John: have <input ref="c" calculate="a+b"/>
19:25:52 [wellsk]
<bind nodeset="c">
19:26:47 [wellsk]
John: ease of authoring, <bind nodeset="c" context=".." value="a+b"/>
19:27:18 [wellsk]
Steve, Nick: loose context
19:27:32 [wellsk]
s/Steve/Steven/
19:28:19 [wellsk]
Nick: which expression, then repeat ref ..
19:29:07 [wellsk]
John: Same person is writing markup, making them repeat info is better than alternative
19:29:29 [wellsk]
Nick: loose general rule, can't do it on a bind, binds to multiple nodes
19:30:16 [wellsk]
Nick: example, calculate c from prev a and b
19:30:55 [wellsk]
Nick abcabcabcabc (that is node elements)
19:31:07 [wellsk]
s/Nick /Nick:/
19:32:44 [wellsk]
Nick: <bind nodeset='c" calculate="prev.sib@::a[1]+prev_sib@::b[1]"/>
19:34:06 [wellsk]
John: <bind nodeset="c" context=".."> <calculate value="prev..."/>
19:34:29 [wellsk]
John: generate a bind, generate a bind with a calculate
19:34:59 [wellsk]
Nick: general case calculate -- loose functionality
19:35:19 [wellsk]
John: implicit to control need something other than default
19:36:17 [wellsk]
Nick: if need explicit which is not done by implicit binds, then you have to define it -- do it completely
19:36:38 [wellsk]
Nick: or remove calculates from others too
19:36:57 [wellsk]
John: express data model, binds and calculates
19:37:13 [wellsk]
John: not .. which would be defaulted
19:37:42 [wellsk]
Nick: in UI layer, then calcuclate isn't relevant?
19:37:59 [wellsk]
John: having to type ".." all the time is a disaster
19:38:28 [wellsk]
John: implied structure of Ui is from data, the 99% case is much more valuable to us
19:38:46 [wellsk]
John: mapping expressed model as generalized
19:39:07 [wellsk]
Mark: nick's case would need explicit model/binds
19:39:46 [wellsk]
Mark: blue sky designing,
19:41:12 [wellsk]
Mark <input name ="b"> <input name="c" relevant=$b" <bind id="b" nodeset="b"/> $b is shorthand for bind
19:41:55 [wellsk]
Mark: <output value="$fn +$sn"/>
19:43:15 [wellsk]
Mark: <bind id="a" nodeset="a"> <bind id="b" nodeset="b"/></bind> -> a/b[1]
19:43:26 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-xforms-20071029/#idref-resolve
19:43:29 [wellsk]
Nick, John: we solved that
19:44:17 [wellsk]
John: second para 4.7.2
19:50:00 [wellsk]
Charlie: need statement arounnd Xforms is the killer app of web
19:50:37 [wellsk]
Charlie: related to consuming web services/feeds/social networking
19:50:53 [wellsk]
Charlie: what is it that needs xforms...
19:51:06 [ebruchez]
I do remember we already talked about Mark's proposal for XPath variables defined with <bind>. Some issues with this was that 1) you really want to have variables in the UI and 2) You want variables to be able to hold *any* content, including strings, numbers and booleans (in XPath 1.0), not only nodesets.
19:51:22 [ebruchez]
So I was more in favor of a more generic xforms:variable construct.
19:51:40 [ebruchez]
(see eXForms for how this can work)
19:51:56 [wellsk]
Mark: got to make it easier
19:52:24 [wellsk]
Charlie: spreadsheet like mashups -- using constraints
19:52:35 [wellsk]
John: what is it we don't have already?
19:52:43 [wellsk]
Charlie: advertising
19:53:04 [wellsk]
Charlie: patterns and constraints with declarative markup
19:53:48 [wellsk]
John: simplification/ease of authoring not selling what those ections are describing
19:54:15 [wellsk]
Mark: modularize --> many more messages than we have there, what is kller message
19:54:53 [wellsk]
Mark: <div> <xf:hint>....</xf:hint></div>
19:55:14 [wellsk]
Mark: A good pattern, javascript/ ajax have fns to do this
19:56:05 [wellsk]
Mark: have things to sell -- which fit use cases (real use cases) a suite of stuff, give xforms message...
19:56:18 [wellsk]
mark: what AJAX programmers model used all the time
19:57:11 [wellsk]
Mark: break things off and bring them into a life of their own.
19:58:07 [wellsk]
Mark: javascript/ajax to add xforms into their practices
19:59:52 [wellsk]
Charlie: how to change the way we work? Modularization?
20:00:12 [wellsk]
Mark: xforms message 1.0, make dtd
20:00:37 [wellsk]
Mark: yahoo could add to xf:hint to library
20:02:26 [wellsk]
Mark: role has taken on life of its own
20:03:04 [wellsk]
Mark: xf:message for xf 1.2, who is to stop xhtml5 to use <message> (no xf:)
20:03:17 [wellsk]
Mark: gets more coverage
20:03:40 [John_Boyer]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features#head-e7a1b9d1817e3a3033d50727e3fb571cfe2d8a2f
20:03:44 [wellsk]
Mark: add message module to ajax/dojo
20:06:17 [Steven]
Scribe: Steven
20:06:35 [Steven]
Mark: I was thinking that we leave out cross-cutting stuff
20:06:43 [Steven]
... so take help, hint and message
20:06:49 [Steven]
John: Alert?
20:06:52 [Steven]
Mark: Could do
20:07:03 [Steven]
... but HTML input's can't have children
20:07:09 [Steven]
s/'s/s/
20:07:32 [Steven]
Mark: They are based on events, the handlers are hidden
20:07:51 [Steven]
... independent of model
20:08:15 [Steven]
... pure text
20:08:34 [Steven]
Mark: Then the cross-cutting stuff joins them all together
20:08:50 [Steven]
...dring...
20:09:20 [Steven]
John: Well, we can have submission with the instances inside submission
20:11:03 [Steven]
Steven: Well, the idea is to factor the stuff out, so that submission just knows that data comes from somewhere
20:11:11 [Steven]
... without saying where exactly
20:11:29 [Steven]
... and then when you use the submission module you say where it coes from, instance in our case
20:12:19 [Steven]
Mark: Take the example of role; there is xh:role, and we say you can use it like that, or import it without namespace (chameleon)
20:15:42 [Steven]
[Mark demonstrates how people do message now with divs, and says that we already package that pattern using the messag element]
20:16:03 [Steven]
Uli: How would you deal with different presentations of message
20:16:11 [Steven]
Mark: With @appearance
20:16:21 [Steven]
s/age/age?/
20:16:37 [Steven]
John: Maybe the module approach helps us to move forward with XForms 2
20:17:41 [Steven]
Mark: I think we have to do this as soon as possible
20:19:19 [Steven]
Charlie: We are the X in AJAX
20:20:13 [Steven]
... but I hear John worrying that this may slow us down, but there is no objection in principle
20:20:58 [Steven]
John: Someone has to take submission to decide whether to factor instance out or not
20:21:15 [Steven]
... I'm happy that it is a single chapter at the moment
20:21:58 [Steven]
Mark: Ajax does a lot of packaging of low-level facilities and mapping it to markup, but they are all different
20:22:15 [Steven]
... but we have matched all these things in a standard way
20:22:38 [Steven]
... and then we have the higher-level stuff like dependencies as well
20:22:54 [Steven]
... but the lower level packaging is impoertnant too
20:23:58 [Steven]
Mark: But take DOJO for instance; it has three different approaches to events; there may be something better than DOM3, but at least we focus on just one solution
20:30:58 [markbirbeck]
Steven: When you add the module instance you get @ref. (Responding to question about how you get bindings onto xf:message.)
20:32:22 [Steven]
Steven: A module introduces elements that have attribute *sets*
20:32:42 [Steven]
... and importing a new module you can add attributes into the sets
20:34:27 [Steven]
Mark: Note that Yahoo have used XForms, but in their own namespace
20:34:45 [Steven]
... we could supply the module that they use and let them really use XForms
20:35:02 [Steven]
... rather than be just *inspired by* XForms
20:35:21 [Zakim]
-ebruchez
20:35:34 [Steven]
zakim, who is on the phone?
20:35:34 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Forms, Leigh_Klotz
20:35:52 [Steven]
zakim, remind me in 10 that it is breaktime
20:35:52 [Zakim]
ok, Steven
20:36:54 [Steven]
Nick: Won't modularisation use up all our time for new features?
20:37:15 [Steven]
Mark: I meant that we should produce modules as we go
20:37:31 [Steven]
... like XHTML2 has produced role, access, rdfa
20:37:39 [Steven]
... and will later combine them
20:38:27 [Steven]
John: I got another message from Chris Lilley
20:38:51 [Steven]
Mark: It also facilitates profiles
20:43:37 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
20:45:43 [Steven]
John: Oh no, I remember, Chris said "No delta specs", I remembered it wrong
20:45:53 [Zakim]
Steven, you asked to be reminded at this time that it is breaktime
20:58:49 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
21:03:08 [Steven]
zakim, who is on the phone?
21:03:08 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Forms, Leigh_Klotz
21:04:01 [Steven]
Keith: What have we decided as the result of this conversation?
21:04:39 [Steven]
John: Specific actions instead of general insert led to the question what are our three bullet points for 1.2?
21:05:29 [Steven]
... I don't like the term "simplification"
21:05:40 [Steven]
... then there was patterns
21:08:22 [Steven]
John: It's about 'consumability'
21:08:32 [Steven]
s/John/Charlie/
21:08:51 [Steven]
John: Which is a very IBM term for making things more approachable by users
21:09:03 [Steven]
s/by/for/
21:11:22 [Steven]
John: But I need my third bullet point...
21:11:47 [Steven]
... 'abstraction' won't do it
21:13:01 [Steven]
... Charlie: Just 'patterns'
21:13:17 [Steven]
s/...//
21:15:11 [Steven]
Keith: XForms patterns
21:15:44 [Steven]
Steven: Usage patterns, so that there is no ambiguity with regexp aptterns
21:18:56 [Steven]
John: XForms pattern reduction
21:19:11 [Steven]
Steven: Pattern simplification?
21:24:25 [Steven]
Charlie: Declarative rich web application patterns
21:25:04 [Steven]
Mark: It's not about simplification, but about codification
21:25:11 [Steven]
[laughter]
21:31:17 [Steven]
[John edits wiki]
21:31:37 [wellsk]
link to change: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features
21:37:46 [Steven]
[live wiki hacking being discussed]
21:38:25 [markbirbeck]
Just in passing, here's a post about how 'XForms is an executable pattern language': http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/2005/09/xforms-executable-pattern-language.html
21:56:31 [Steven]
[Discussion of what determines when something is a 'pattern']
21:57:31 [Steven]
Mark: We should definitely retain the simplification for authors
21:57:50 [Steven]
... but modularisation would allow [parts of] XForms to get into more places
22:09:58 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #forms
22:11:52 [markbirbeck]
http://ajaxpatterns.org/Patterns
22:13:29 [markbirbeck]
http://ajaxpatterns.org/Popup
22:20:23 [wellsk]
http://www.42ndstoysterbar.com/
22:22:36 [Zakim]
-Leigh_Klotz
22:23:33 [Steven]
you finished leigh?
22:24:32 [Steven]
klotz?
22:28:08 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
22:33:17 [Zakim]
+??P0
22:33:25 [ebruchez]
zakim, ??P0 is ebruchez
22:33:25 [Zakim]
+ebruchez; got it
22:33:52 [ebruchez]
just did
22:34:01 [ebruchez]
all right
22:34:43 [nick]
Kieth: Call them Modular patterns
22:35:05 [nick]
Keith: Construction Patterns
22:35:50 [nick]
Ssteven: Composition patterns
22:36:31 [nick]
John: What can we Pattern discovery really call?
22:36:49 [nick]
John: Grouping control patterns
22:37:19 [nick]
Scribe: Nick
22:39:32 [nick]
John: Where go Same model item property on the same node
22:41:38 [nick]
John: Same model item property goes to composition
22:42:17 [nick]
Steven: @context everywhere should go to Generalisation
22:43:54 [nick]
John: Should we change Usability Patterns to Functional and Usability Patterns
22:51:18 [nick]
John: Can we change Usability patterns in Implicit model patterns
22:53:29 [nick]
John: Language Usability patterns
22:53:37 [nick]
Markb: Authoring patterns
22:54:35 [nick]
MarB: Ease of Athoring Pattern
22:55:34 [nick]
John: All of them except @context are model optional ones
22:58:52 [wellsk]
wellsk has left #forms
22:58:57 [Steven]
Lobster time
22:59:01 [Steven]
zakim, who is here?
22:59:01 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Forms, ebruchez
22:59:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see unl, shepazu, nick, Steeeven, CharlieW, Zakim, markbirbeck, ebruchez, klotz, Steven, RRSAgent, John_Boyer, trackbot-ng
23:00:09 [CharlieW]
CharlieW has left #forms
23:03:03 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
23:03:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-minutes.html Steven
23:03:17 [Zakim]
-ebruchez
23:03:34 [Steven]
zakim, drop forms
23:03:34 [Zakim]
Forms is being disconnected
23:03:35 [Zakim]
Team_(forms)18:00Z has ended
23:03:36 [Zakim]
Attendees were Forms, ebruchez, Leigh_Klotz
23:03:43 [Steven]
zakim, bye
23:03:43 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #forms
23:03:56 [Steven]
trackbot-ng, end meeting
23:03:56 [trackbot-ng]
Zakim, list attendees
23:03:57 [trackbot-ng]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
23:03:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-minutes.html trackbot-ng
23:03:58 [trackbot-ng]
RRSAgent, bye
23:03:58 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-actions.rdf :
23:03:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: John_Boyer to solve default trigger problem for 1.2 by coming up with better DOMActivate behavior and then creating the ease of authoring shorthand [1]
23:03:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-irc#T14-48-36
23:03:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Uli to work on context "pretty much everywhere (see the minutes) [2]
23:03:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/02/04-forms-irc#T15-13-16