See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: wiecha
Leigh: no news
John: don't think Steven had any either
Nick: updated the list according to F2F and last meetings
there are a couple of resolutions w/o action items
Leigh: ok, let's assign those
<scribe> ACTION: Leigh Klotz to rename XForms for HTML to XForms Attributes for HTML [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/14-forms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-615 - Klotz to rename XForms for HTML to XForms Attributes for HTML [on Leigh Klotz, Jr. - due 2010-04-21].
Leigh: the next one, for relaxing constraints, is already done
also for p3ptype
Leigh: still think we need to do something on task force for access control
does anybody implement parsing those headers?
XHR will enforce this already
would suggest we add access control back on the on-going agenda
John: let's update our understanding of the requirements here
Leigh: let's otherwise close the action on Mark
and track this as a group on the agenda
action to respond to last call for XHR...we haven't discussed this but did interact with them w/o success
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - to
so we should close this action
can close steven's action to check on f2f and recharting
and also for kenneth and json issues
forms wg charter w/john boyer is done
John: as would the item on my list
for kenneth, first item on json is done, can close
John: i've also completed my action on form parts...pls close
Leigh: steven has action to arrange for this
Nick: steven checking on 4-day meeting option
Leigh: so yes, we're meeting...either for 2 days for 4...will report to XCG
John: in looking at designing forms starting from existing schemas which make use of xsd:duration have found that xforms:duration is not supported, now say processors support all xsd datatypes except for duration and a few others
but durations are popular in BPM applications :-)
it happens that the schema processor attached to our xforms processor is fine with xsd:duration
so this is just a spec issue
no type MIP was created
given it's omitted from the spec
Leigh: there are problems with comparison operations
Nick: don't know how many days in a month so comparing two durations is hard
John: yes, but this seems outside the scope of XForms
we have subtypes with ordering, but not the composite type
those are useful additions
but doesn't imply losing xsd:duration
Nick: the spec only says xsd:duration is not recommended for ...
John: Section 5.1 say's they're
not supported in totality
... think this is mistaken...if I can support xsd:duration in my schema and in a type, hard to believe it's not valid in a type MIP
Leigh: supported as abstract datatype
John: yes, this means supported as base type to derive xforms:daytime and yearmonth durations
derived by restriction from xsd:duration
authors should be allowed to use xsd:duration even given its lack of convenience
Leigh: also for xforms:duration?
John: xsd:duration already allows empty string
Nick: do the same for duration as for the other types
Leigh: what is the schema for schema for duration?
John: regular expression...
ours would be simpler...just the union of xsd:duration and empty string
could just do an erratum
optional for 1.1 processors...better than not having it at all
current behavior is not having any type restriction at all
Leigh: sounds good for basic type, why also the convenience type now?
John: would be forced to use a schema to define it myself in the app
Leigh: should this be a 1.2 module?
and then suggest implementing it in 1.1 processors...
Leigh: what's the cut between errata and 1.2?
John: for xsd:duration, claim it's not supported seems to be basically wrong
since it can be used directly in the type MIP
and our intention was to define the corresponding empty type for each supported xsd type
<klotz> Since XML Schema Part X does not define xs:duration as an abstract type, it is erroneous for XForms 1.1 to attempt to redefine it as such in a note.
John: then we could introduce the xforms type in the schema which is already not normative so updateable
Leigh: so the argument for 1.1
erratum is that it's incorrect as stated
... any opinion this should be delayed to 1.2?
proposed resolution: amend the note stating xsd:duration is unsupported to allow for its use
<John_Boyer> In 5.1, XForms supports all XML schema 1.0 data types except... remove xsd:duration from that list
<John_Boyer> In the following note, The built-in datatype xsd:duration does not support a total ordering. Form authors are encouraged to used xforms:dayTimeDuration or xforms:yearMonthDuration instead
<John_Boyer> In 5.2.1, add duration to list of built-in primitive types in the xforms namespace
Resolution: xsd:duration and the xforms:duration including empty string is also supported
<scribe> ACTION: John_Boyer to write erratum supporting xsd:duration and xforms:duration [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/14-forms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - John_Boyer
Nick: have a 1.2 item related to this
<scribe> ACTION: John_Boyer to create erratum category on the forms wiki [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/04/14-forms-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - John_Boyer
Nick: would like to get opinion on moving to xsd 1.1 part 2 data types in xforms 1.2
Leigh: is 1.1 rec?
Nick: still a WD
Leigh: think something is coming out soon
John: what is the NS for those types?
Leigh: would think it would be the same
Nick: xsd 1.1 is intended backwards compat. with 1.0
John: that's good since it would then be feasible for implementors to add those new types to schemas to provide all of xforms types
i.e. to avoid NS conflicts
Leigh: idea sounds fine depending on dates when drafts/recs published
John: also the question on the rest of xsd 1.1 not just the types
Nick: right, the types are the easy part
John: Phillip mentioned the utility of the assertion mechanism relative to xf:constraint
may cause some issues related to live validation when data are changing vs. validating one-time
John: constraints run during recalculate, schema runs during revalidate
so you'd have calculation like constraints running after the "calculate" phase is over
not saying this won't work...just not sure
Nick: just run schema processor every time
Leigh: global or tied to nodes?
need to add the general use of xsd 1.1 to the list of topics to discuss
also 0004 and 0005
Nick: still think that form parts look like custom components, and importing models is a bit different...john seems to agree
John: yes, feel that form parts is interesting but there's also XBL
those are more generic composite controls
form parts is a design-time injection of code...little closer to runtime model/@src but does two injections (model and control)
John: the important bit is defining the injection points into the UI layer
the model position isn't really functional
so external model imports using something like @src or @import is simpler than these two alternatives
Leigh: when you generate the data layer how do you avoid name conflicts?
John: programmatic renaming at design time
so @id conflict resolution is easier for us - no runtime issues
Leigh: if we used model/@src we'd depend on unique @id's
so why is include not good enough?
John: faster for us to get it in just as a design-time feature
Leigh: why does your use case suggest model/@src vs. include?
John: not sure it does
Leigh: this is my concern...that it seems just doing something very close to include is not sufficient
John: the other reason we're doing form parts is we have two injection points...more important is the UI one
w/o doing nested forms and model-model communication, form parts gives us reuse
so it we can't do both injection points model/@src probably isn't useful
John: simple case of reusable web services declarations would be useful
Leigh: include would probably handle that though
lack of parameters on straight inclusion is a problem
Leigh: one approach is to start with something simple, other option is not not "use up" that syntax and make the real solution harder
John: I'm winding up in that latter camp
Leigh: could start with model/@src with scoping rules
John: could then expand later with a portion of a document that contains UI w/updated content
Leigh: starts looking like xpointer
John: would probably focus on the UI injection and handle the model part as a side-effect
Leigh: in summary what's the take-away from your use case and model/@src?
John: like the @id scoping resolution to get closer to form parts
seems to be unavoidable part of a solution
Leigh: some form of encapsulation
then if we could use that import element *anywhere* and if it had UI and model elements it would "do the right thing" in terms of import
Leigh: sounds like Nick's point that this sounds like a component
John: perhaps, but some of the other component technologies are a bit more complex in separating submodels
Leigh: that's a more extreme version of encapsulation
John: right...this leads to all the model-model communication issues
import for model only, the fragments just work together
Leigh: Nick, can you pick this up by email?
not sure what's the next step
Leigh: ok, let's pick it up in the next call
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: wiecha Inferring ScribeNick: wiecha Default Present: ebruchez, Leigh_Klotz, wiecha, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, +0782483aaaa Present: ebruchez Leigh_Klotz wiecha Nick_van_den_Bleeken John_Boyer +0782483aaaa WARNING: No meeting title found! You should specify the meeting title like this: <dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2010Apr/0008.html WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Got date from IRC log name: 14 Apr 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/04/14-forms-minutes.html People with action items: john_boyer klotz leigh WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]