15:41:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #forms
15:41:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-irc
15:41:51 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, make log public
15:42:23 <John_Boyer> Meeting: Weekly Forms WG Teleconference
15:42:30 <John_Boyer> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0011.html
15:42:37 <John_Boyer> John_Boyer has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0011.html
15:42:45 <John_Boyer> Chair: John
15:42:52 <John_Boyer> Regrets: Leigh, Susan, Joern
15:43:19 <wellsk> wellsk has joined #forms
15:44:42 <Zakim> HTML_Forms()10:45AM has now started
15:44:49 <Zakim> + +1.919.254.aaaa
15:45:01 <wellsk> zakim, aaaa is wellsk
15:45:01 <Zakim> +wellsk; got it
15:46:04 <ebruchez> ebruchez has joined #forms
15:46:17 <nic1> nic1 has joined #forms
15:46:22 <nic1> zakim, code?
15:46:22 <Zakim> the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), nic1
15:46:35 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:46:42 <ebruchez> zakim [IP is ebruchez
15:46:56 <ebruchez> zakim, [IP is ebruchez
15:46:56 <Zakim> +ebruchez; got it
15:46:59 <John_Boyer> zakim sure is busy
15:47:10 <Zakim> +Nick_van_den_Bleeken
15:47:26 <nic1> zakim, mute me
15:47:26 <Zakim> Nick_van_den_Bleeken should now be muted
15:47:28 <Roger> Roger has joined #forms
15:47:38 <Zakim> +John_Boyer
15:47:44 <nic1> zakim, who is here?
15:47:44 <Zakim> On the phone I see wellsk, ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken (muted), John_Boyer
15:47:45 <Roger> zakim, code?
15:47:47 <Zakim> On IRC I see Roger, nic1, ebruchez, wellsk, RRSAgent, Zakim, John_Boyer, markbirbeck, Steven, shepazu, trackbot-ng
15:47:49 <Zakim> the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Roger
15:48:13 <wellsk> zakim, mute me
15:48:13 <Zakim> wellsk should now be muted
15:49:42 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has left #forms
15:49:51 <markbirbeck> markbirbeck has joined #forms
15:49:59 <markbirbeck> zakim, code?
15:49:59 <Zakim> the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), markbirbeck
15:50:01 <Zakim> + +34.91.211.aabb
15:50:15 <Roger> zakim, +34 is Roger
15:50:15 <Zakim> +Roger; got it
15:50:25 <John_Boyer> zakim, who is here?
15:50:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see wellsk (muted), ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken (muted), John_Boyer, Roger
15:50:28 <Zakim> On IRC I see markbirbeck, Roger, nic1, ebruchez, wellsk, RRSAgent, Zakim, John_Boyer, Steven, shepazu, trackbot-ng
15:50:33 <Steven> trackbot, start call
15:50:44 <Zakim> +??P5
15:50:45 <Steven> trackbot-ng, start call
15:50:47 <markbirbeck> zakim, i am ?
15:50:47 <Zakim> +markbirbeck; got it
15:51:21 <nic1> yes john
15:51:47 <nic1> one earlier then now
15:51:54 <Steven> zakim, dial steven-617
15:51:54 <Zakim> ok, Steven; the call is being made
15:51:56 <Zakim> +Steven
15:52:10 <nic1> meeting time  is stable to GMT
15:52:23 <Steven> no, stable to Boston
15:52:29 <nic1> ok
15:52:53 <nic1> depends when GMT changes
15:54:05 <Steven> GMT never changes
15:54:40 <John_Boyer> zakim, who is here?
15:54:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see wellsk (muted), ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken (muted), John_Boyer, Roger, markbirbeck, Steven
15:54:42 <Zakim> On IRC I see markbirbeck, Roger, nic1, ebruchez, wellsk, RRSAgent, Zakim, John_Boyer, Steven, shepazu, trackbot-ng
15:58:27 <Charlie> Charlie has joined #forms
15:58:35 <John_Boyer> Scribe: Nick
15:58:46 <John_Boyer> scribenick: nic1
15:58:50 <Steven> scribenick: nic1
15:59:33 <unl> unl has joined #forms
15:59:59 <nic1> TOPIC: Upcoming telecons
16:00:17 <Zakim> +Ulrich_Nicolas_Lisse
16:00:25 <Steven> trackbot-ng,help
16:00:30 <nic1> Steven: The html calls moves 1 hour, so there is a collision of 15 minutes
16:00:44 <Steven> trackbot-ng, help
16:00:44 <trackbot-ng> See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ for help (use the IRC bot link)
16:00:58 <unl> sorry for being late, had to go to the pharmacy, my daughter is not feeling very well
16:01:05 <John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0011.html
16:01:05 <nic1> John: So the next calls will start 15 minutes later, it is still 15 minutes longer then before
16:01:19 <unl> zakim, Ulrich_Nicolas_Lisse is me
16:01:19 <Zakim> +unl; got it
16:01:26 <unl> zakim, mute me
16:01:26 <Zakim> unl should now be muted
16:01:59 <nic1> s/So the next calls will start 15 minutes later, it is still 15 minutes longer then before/Ok then steven and mark will be 15 minutes late/
16:02:16 <markbirbeck> zakim, mute me
16:02:16 <Zakim> markbirbeck should now be muted
16:02:16 <nic1> TOPIC:Group meeting time at Tech Plenary
16:02:21 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
16:02:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html Steven
16:02:28 <nic1> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0004.html
16:02:41 <Steven> rrsagent, make log public
16:02:46 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
16:02:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html Steven
16:02:46 <John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0004.html
16:02:56 <nic1> John: We need to say which days we want to meet
16:03:54 <nic1> John: They wanting to change the schedule, and allow meetings to overlap, to avoid the meeting day at Saturday 
16:04:18 <nic1> John: Mo-Tu or Th-Fri or only one day
16:04:54 <nic1> John: No more Saturdays
16:05:28 <nic1> Steven: I think we only don't want a clash with XHTML
16:05:57 <John_Boyer> Oct21-22 versus Oct.23-24
16:06:06 <nic1> John: Does anyone, have a preference for earlier or later in the week for XForms?
16:06:19 <nic1> silence 
16:06:33 <nic1> John: We will go for no preference in days
16:06:42 <John_Boyer> But "two days needed"
16:07:00 <nic1> TOPIC: Input Mode Issues
16:07:41 <nic1> John: We got a response from Martin Duerst, steven can you have a look to the response?
16:07:52 <nic1> Steven: Surely 
16:08:26 <John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html
16:08:46 <nic1> ACTION: Steven will propose wording for appendix E in response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html
16:08:46 <trackbot-ng> Created ACTION-454 - Will propose wording for appendix E in response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html [on Steven Pemberton - due 2008-03-12].
16:09:18 <nic1> TOPIC: What is process for publishing XForms 1.2 requirements?
16:09:48 <nic1> John: Got some push back from HCG to use the wiki for requirements
16:10:05 <nic1> John: They want it to be published as a WG Note
16:12:29 <nic1> John: We can go on writing it on the wiki, and in a couple of months we can convert it to SpecXML
16:13:27 <Steven> "Purpose: A Working Group's Last Call announcement is a signal that: 
16:13:27 <Steven> the Working Group believes that it has satisfied its relevant technical requirements (e.g., of the charter or requirements document) in the Working Draft;"
16:13:57 <Steven> The process doesn't require a requirements doc, but doesn't forbid one either
16:14:14 <nic1> TOPIC: Make progress on "Add Model Item Properties to UI Level"
16:14:19 <markbirbeck> zakim, unmute me
16:14:19 <Zakim> markbirbeck should no longer be muted
16:14:25 <John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0010.html
16:15:38 <nic1> John: We wanted to figure out what the simplified syntax is for a purchase order
16:16:47 <nic1> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Add_model_item_properties_to_UI_level
16:17:14 <John_Boyer> Need to decide whether MIP attributes on controls create MIPs or whether they create properties of UI controls
16:17:26 <John_Boyer> If the former, then we need "Unified Context" work from nick
16:17:32 <Steven> I vote for MIPs
16:17:51 <John_Boyer> If the latter then we don't need "Unified Context" but it's a lot more work to describe the processing model for UI properties
16:17:55 <Steven> ... makes the processing model more obvious, and creates no new rules
16:18:15 <Steven> s/no new/fewer new/
16:18:47 <nic1> ack, me
16:18:53 <nic1> ack me
16:19:07 <John_Boyer> Nick agrees with Steven
16:19:10 <unl> +1 for MIPs
16:19:50 <John_Boyer> Erik: Not sure it matters much to the author
16:19:53 <nic1> Nick: I agree implying MIPS (binds)
16:20:40 <John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Unified_evaluation_context
16:21:08 <nic1> Erik: I think that making the simplified syntax well is more important then mapping it to existing structures, it should stop us if we need to create a lot of new spec text
16:21:58 <Zakim> +[IBM]
16:22:05 <Charlie> zakim, [IBM] is Charlie
16:22:05 <Zakim> +Charlie; got it
16:22:08 <John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features
16:22:27 <nic1> Erik: We talked last week of combining MIPS, and that is related to simplifying forms
16:22:51 <ebruchez> uh, that is NOT related
16:23:17 <nic1> John: There is the mandatory section and Supplementary and the example is in the Supplementary
16:23:18 <John_Boyer> s/is related/is NOT related
16:25:46 <nic1> MarkB: I've done some work on it
16:26:44 <nic1> John: We talked a lot of implying mips on the binds, but mark asked last week if we already decided if they aren't local to the UI
16:28:17 <nic1> Erik: We could define the evaluation context of the readonly attribute on the UI elements
16:28:34 <John_Boyer> Erik: The evaluation context of these new attributes could be different than how we currently define it
16:28:57 <John_Boyer> MarkB: Favors locally attaching the properties to the UI controls
16:29:23 <ebruchez> <xforms:output ... calculate="a + b">
16:30:20 <John_Boyer> <xforms:output name="c" calculate="power(a*a+b*b, 0.5)"/>
16:30:26 <nic1> John: A good example is evaluation context for the calculate of an output
16:32:31 <nic1> John: Explains the name allows references to the result of the output control
16:34:12 <John_Boyer> Nick: Doesn't the "variable" concept (the dollar proposal) break down inside a repeat?
16:34:18 <John_Boyer> John: Yes I suspected it would
16:34:32 <John_Boyer> John: That's why I want to do this example.
16:34:32 <Charlie> how would this work in HTML4/5 forms?
16:35:36 <nic1> John: I want it to create elements, the UI imposes the structure of the instance
16:35:46 <John_Boyer> <repeat name="order" nodeset="row">
16:36:00 <John_Boyer> <input name="Product">...
16:36:15 <John_Boyer> <input name="Quantity">
16:36:21 <John_Boyer> <input name="Price">
16:36:40 <John_Boyer> <output name="LineTotal" calculate="Price* Quantity"/>
16:36:42 <John_Boyer> </repeat>
16:37:05 <nic1> Erik: proposes a control() which will refer to the elements produced by the ui control
16:37:14 <ebruchez> sum(control('my-control'))
16:37:27 <John_Boyer> <output name="subtotal" calculate="sum(order/row/LineTotal)"/>
16:37:28 <ebruchez> s/my-control/line-subtotal
16:39:06 <nic1> MarkB: explains that referring to the value of elements (binds, ui controls) with xpath-variables
16:39:42 <nic1> Erik: We have to be careful with how we use variables
16:40:06 <nic1> MarkB: A variable is a nodeset 
16:41:23 <unl> unl has joined #forms
16:41:26 <nic1> MarkB: Explains that all binds could be available in the UI
16:43:50 <nic1> John: Explains the example he just posted
16:44:52 <nic1> Erik: I want to see full examples of possible simplified syntax, then we can choose the best one
16:44:54 <John_Boyer> I think the above markup for PO implies this data:
16:44:56 <John_Boyer> <data>
16:45:00 <John_Boyer> <order>
16:45:06 <John_Boyer> <row>
16:45:10 <John_Boyer> <Product>
16:45:15 <John_Boyer> <Quantity>
16:45:19 <John_Boyer> <Price>
16:45:22 <John_Boyer> <LineTotal>
16:45:48 <John_Boyer> </row>
16:45:52 <John_Boyer> </order>
16:45:58 <John_Boyer> <subtotal>
16:46:03 <John_Boyer> </data>
16:46:19 <John_Boyer> And these binds:
16:47:06 <nic1> MarkB: Your proposal omits '..' this will need a change in our spec, and your proposal doesn't uses a calculate and not a value
16:47:13 <John_Boyer> <bind nodeset="order/row"> <bind nodeset="LineTotal"><calculate context=".." value="Price*Quantity"/></bind></bind>
16:47:55 <John_Boyer> <bind nodeset="subtotal"> <calculate context=".." value="sum(order/row/LineTotal)"/></bind>
16:48:05 <nic1> MarkB: The architecture is important, I would propose that a control creates a bind and you will then be able to refer to that bind
16:51:24 <nic1> Nick: Your name is just a ref that doesn't changes the inline evaluation context of the other attributes on the control
16:52:53 <markbirbeck> <label for="unitCost">Unit Cost</label>
16:52:53 <markbirbeck> <input id="unitCost" name="unitCost" />
16:53:18 <markbirbeck> <xf:bind id="auto_1" nodeset="unitCost" />
16:53:19 <markbirbeck> <xf:input bind="auto_1">
16:53:19 <markbirbeck>   <xf:lael>Unit Cost</xf:lael>
16:53:19 <markbirbeck> </xf:input>
16:53:33 <markbirbeck> s/lael/label/
16:54:18 <nic1> MarkB: Explains his proposal
16:54:26 <Steven> s/lael/label/G
16:54:57 <markbirbeck> <input name="unitCost" />
16:55:36 <markbirbeck> <xf:bind id="unitCost" nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />
16:56:19 <markbirbeck> <xf:bind nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />
16:56:53 <markbirbeck> So what I'm getting at is that this should be able to work, in whatever model we adopt:
16:57:02 <markbirbeck> <xf:bind nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />
16:57:10 <markbirbeck> <input name="unitCost" />
16:57:30 <nic1> I think so, otherwise it would be a failure of us
16:57:33 <markbirbeck> that way the author is very gradually adding more and more XForms.
16:58:14 <nic1> John: Ok so, I'm not seeing a lot of difference between Mark's and mine proposal
17:00:09 <nic1> MarkB: You are saying that your name is a ref and in my proposal it is a bind
17:00:52 <markbirbeck> <xf:output id="lineTotal" value="$unitCost + $qty"> 
17:00:52 <markbirbeck>   <xf:label>Line Total</xf:label>
17:00:52 <markbirbeck> </xf:output>
17:03:44 <nic1> MarkB: John is referring to a node, in mine you refer to a variable
17:09:19 <Charlie> mark, could you please give the subtotal expression in IRC?
17:09:39 <Charlie> .e. sum over lineTotal...
17:10:03 <nic1> Erik: We also need local variables, not only the 'global' bind variables
17:10:47 <nic1> http://www.exforms.org/variable.html
17:12:21 <nic1> Erik: we need to make it consistent, definitely the scoping rules
17:13:15 <markbirbeck> <xf:output name="lineTotal" value="$unitCost[7] + $qty[7]"> 
17:13:15 <markbirbeck>   <xf:label>Line Total</xf:label>
17:13:15 <markbirbeck> </xf:output>
17:13:17 <nic1> MarkB: Wonders if the syntax will work in a repeat
17:13:45 <markbirbeck> sum($unitCost)
17:13:55 <nic1> $unitCost[index()]
17:14:18 <markbirbeck> yes nic1 :)
17:14:29 <markbirbeck> 7 was easier to type :)
17:14:40 <nic1> John: We need some further work on it
17:14:53 <nic1> John: Even before the next week...
17:16:01 <nic1> bye 
17:16:01 <Zakim> -unl
17:16:02 <Zakim> -Steven
17:16:02 <Zakim> -markbirbeck
17:16:02 <Roger> bye
17:16:03 <Zakim> -wellsk
17:16:03 <Zakim> -Charlie
17:16:03 <Charlie> Charlie has left #forms
17:16:04 <Zakim> -ebruchez
17:16:05 <Zakim> -Nick_van_den_Bleeken
17:16:06 <Zakim> -John_Boyer
17:16:12 <Zakim> -Roger
17:16:13 <Zakim> HTML_Forms()10:45AM has ended
17:16:14 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.919.254.aaaa, wellsk, [IPcaller], ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, +34.91.211.aabb, Roger, markbirbeck, Steven, unl, Charlie
17:16:29 <wellsk> wellsk has left #forms
17:17:15 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, make minutes
17:17:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html John_Boyer
17:17:24 <John_Boyer> rrsagent, bye
17:17:24 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-actions.rdf :
17:17:24 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Steven will propose wording for appendix E in response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html [1]
17:17:24 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-irc#T16-08-46