Weekly Forms WG Teleconference

05 Mar 2008


See also: IRC log


+1.919.254.aaaa, wellsk, [IPcaller], ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, +34.91.211.aabb, Roger, markbirbeck, Steven, unl, Charlie
Leigh, Susan, Joern




<ebruchez> zakim [IP is ebruchez

<John_Boyer> zakim sure is busy

<Steven> trackbot, start call

<Steven> trackbot-ng, start call

yes john

one earlier then now

meeting time is stable to GMT

<Steven> no, stable to Boston


depends when GMT changes

<Steven> GMT never changes

<John_Boyer> Scribe: Nick

<John_Boyer> scribenick: nic1

<Steven> scribenick: nic1

Upcoming telecons

<Steven> trackbot-ng,help

Steven: The html calls moves 1 hour, so there is a collision of 15 minutes

<Steven> trackbot-ng, help

<trackbot-ng> See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ for help (use the IRC bot link)

<unl> sorry for being late, had to go to the pharmacy, my daughter is not feeling very well

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0011.html

John: Ok then steven and mark will be 15 minutes late

Group meeting time at Tech Plenary


<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0004.html

John: We need to say which days we want to meet
... They wanting to change the schedule, and allow meetings to overlap, to avoid the meeting day at Saturday
... Mo-Tu or Th-Fri or only one day
... No more Saturdays

Steven: I think we only don't want a clash with XHTML

<John_Boyer> Oct21-22 versus Oct.23-24

John: Does anyone, have a preference for earlier or later in the week for XForms?


John: We will go for no preference in days

<John_Boyer> But "two days needed"

Input Mode Issues

John: We got a response from Martin Duerst, steven can you have a look to the response?

Steven: Surely

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html

<scribe> ACTION: Steven will propose wording for appendix E in response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<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].

What is process for publishing XForms 1.2 requirements?

John: Got some push back from HCG to use the wiki for requirements
... They want it to be published as a WG Note
... We can go on writing it on the wiki, and in a couple of months we can convert it to SpecXML

<Steven> "Purpose: A Working Group's Last Call announcement is a signal that:

<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;"

<Steven> The process doesn't require a requirements doc, but doesn't forbid one either

Make progress on "Add Model Item Properties to UI Level"

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0010.html

John: We wanted to figure out what the simplified syntax is for a purchase order


<John_Boyer> Need to decide whether MIP attributes on controls create MIPs or whether they create properties of UI controls

<John_Boyer> If the former, then we need "Unified Context" work from nick

<Steven> I vote for MIPs

<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

<Steven> ... makes the processing model more obvious, and creates fewer new rules

ack, me

<John_Boyer> Nick agrees with Steven

<unl> +1 for MIPs

<John_Boyer> Erik: Not sure it matters much to the author

Nick: I agree implying MIPS (binds)

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Unified_evaluation_context

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

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features

Erik: We talked last week of combining MIPS, and that is NOT related to simplifying forms

<ebruchez> uh, that is NOT related

John: There is the mandatory section and Supplementary and the example is in the Supplementary

MarkB: I've done some work on it

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

Erik: We could define the evaluation context of the readonly attribute on the UI elements

<John_Boyer> Erik: The evaluation context of these new attributes could be different than how we currently define it

<John_Boyer> MarkB: Favors locally attaching the properties to the UI controls

<ebruchez> <xforms:output ... calculate="a + b">

<John_Boyer> <xforms:output name="c" calculate="power(a*a+b*b, 0.5)"/>

John: A good example is evaluation context for the calculate of an output
... Explains the name allows references to the result of the output control

<John_Boyer> Nick: Doesn't the "variable" concept (the dollar proposal) break down inside a repeat?

<John_Boyer> John: Yes I suspected it would

<John_Boyer> John: That's why I want to do this example.

<Charlie> how would this work in HTML4/5 forms?

John: I want it to create elements, the UI imposes the structure of the instance

<John_Boyer> <repeat name="order" nodeset="row">

<John_Boyer> <input name="Product">...

<John_Boyer> <input name="Quantity">

<John_Boyer> <input name="Price">

<John_Boyer> <output name="LineTotal" calculate="Price* Quantity"/>

<John_Boyer> </repeat>

Erik: proposes a control() which will refer to the elements produced by the ui control

<ebruchez> sum(control('line-subtotal'))

<John_Boyer> <output name="subtotal" calculate="sum(order/row/LineTotal)"/>

MarkB: explains that referring to the value of elements (binds, ui controls) with xpath-variables

Erik: We have to be careful with how we use variables

MarkB: A variable is a nodeset
... Explains that all binds could be available in the UI

John: Explains the example he just posted

Erik: I want to see full examples of possible simplified syntax, then we can choose the best one

<John_Boyer> I think the above markup for PO implies this data:

<John_Boyer> <data>

<John_Boyer> <order>

<John_Boyer> <row>

<John_Boyer> <Product>

<John_Boyer> <Quantity>

<John_Boyer> <Price>

<John_Boyer> <LineTotal>

<John_Boyer> </row>

<John_Boyer> </order>

<John_Boyer> <subtotal>

<John_Boyer> </data>

<John_Boyer> And these binds:

MarkB: Your proposal omits '..' this will need a change in our spec, and your proposal doesn't uses a calculate and not a value

<John_Boyer> <bind nodeset="order/row"> <bind nodeset="LineTotal"><calculate context=".." value="Price*Quantity"/></bind></bind>

<John_Boyer> <bind nodeset="subtotal"> <calculate context=".." value="sum(order/row/LineTotal)"/></bind>

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

Nick: Your name is just a ref that doesn't changes the inline evaluation context of the other attributes on the control

<markbirbeck> <label for="unitCost">Unit Cost</label>

<markbirbeck> <input id="unitCost" name="unitCost" />

<markbirbeck> <xf:bind id="auto_1" nodeset="unitCost" />

<markbirbeck> <xf:input bind="auto_1">

<markbirbeck> <xf:label>Unit Cost</xf:label>

<markbirbeck> </xf:input>

MarkB: Explains his proposal

<markbirbeck> <input name="unitCost" />

<markbirbeck> <xf:bind id="unitCost" nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />

<markbirbeck> <xf:bind nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />

<markbirbeck> So what I'm getting at is that this should be able to work, in whatever model we adopt:

<markbirbeck> <xf:bind nodeset="unitCost" readonly="true()" />

<markbirbeck> <input name="unitCost" />

I think so, otherwise it would be a failure of us

<markbirbeck> that way the author is very gradually adding more and more XForms.

John: Ok so, I'm not seeing a lot of difference between Mark's and mine proposal

MarkB: You are saying that your name is a ref and in my proposal it is a bind

<markbirbeck> <xf:output id="lineTotal" value="$unitCost + $qty">

<markbirbeck> <xf:label>Line Total</xf:label>

<markbirbeck> </xf:output>

MarkB: John is referring to a node, in mine you refer to a variable

<Charlie> mark, could you please give the subtotal expression in IRC?

<Charlie> .e. sum over lineTotal...

Erik: We also need local variables, not only the 'global' bind variables


Erik: we need to make it consistent, definitely the scoping rules

<markbirbeck> <xf:output name="lineTotal" value="$unitCost[7] + $qty[7]">

<markbirbeck> <xf:label>Line Total</xf:label>

<markbirbeck> </xf:output>

MarkB: Wonders if the syntax will work in a repeat

<markbirbeck> sum($unitCost)


<markbirbeck> yes nic1 :)

<markbirbeck> 7 was easier to type :)

John: We need some further work on it
... Even before the next week...


<Roger> bye

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Steven will propose wording for appendix E in response to http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Feb/0074.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/03/05 17:17:21 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: 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/
Succeeded: s/no new/fewer new/
Succeeded: s/is related/is NOT related/
Succeeded: s/my-control/line-subtotal/
Succeeded: s/lael/label/
Succeeded: s/lael/label/G
Found Scribe: Nick
Found ScribeNick: nic1
Found ScribeNick: nic1
Default Present: +1.919.254.aaaa, wellsk, [IPcaller], ebruchez, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, +34.91.211.aabb, Roger, markbirbeck, Steven, unl, Charlie
Present: +1.919.254.aaaa wellsk [IPcaller] ebruchez Nick_van_den_Bleeken John_Boyer +34.91.211.aabb Roger markbirbeck Steven unl Charlie
Regrets: Leigh Susan Joern
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0011.html
Got date from IRC log name: 05 Mar 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/03/05-forms-minutes.html
People with action items: steven

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]