IRC log of forms on 2012-04-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:58:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #forms
14:58:48 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc
14:58:50 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:58:50 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #forms
14:58:52 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be IA_XForms
14:58:52 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see IA_XForms()11:00AM already started
14:58:53 [trackbot]
Meeting: Forms Working Group Teleconference
14:58:53 [trackbot]
Date: 11 April 2012
14:59:27 [Steven_]
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2012Apr/0005
14:59:49 [Zakim]
+??P4
15:00:04 [alain]
Zakim, ??P4 is me
15:00:05 [Zakim]
+alain; got it
15:00:29 [Zakim]
+??P6
15:00:40 [Steven_]
zakim, I am ??P6
15:00:40 [Zakim]
+Steven_; got it
15:00:57 [Steven_]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:00:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see +44.782.483.aaaa, alain, Steven_
15:01:17 [Steven_]
zakim, +44 is pfennell
15:01:17 [Zakim]
+pfennell; got it
15:01:33 [Steven_]
zakim, Steven_ is Steven
15:01:33 [Zakim]
+Steven; got it
15:02:45 [nvdbleek]
zakim, code?
15:02:49 [Zakim]
the conference code is 93676 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), nvdbleek
15:03:42 [Zakim]
+ +1.323.425.aabb
15:03:59 [nvdbleek]
zakim, I am +1.3
15:04:09 [Zakim]
+nvdbleek; got it
15:04:39 [nvdbleek]
zakim, who is here?
15:04:53 [Zakim]
On the phone I see pfennell, alain, Steven, nvdbleek
15:05:03 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, Steven_, pfennell, alain, Steven, nvdbleek, trackbot
15:07:03 [John_Boyer]
John_Boyer has joined #forms
15:07:56 [ebruchez]
ebruchez has joined #forms
15:08:40 [Zakim]
+John_Boyer
15:09:35 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.919.aacc
15:09:42 [Steven_]
Scribe: John
15:09:49 [ebruchez]
zakim +1.650.919.aacc is ebruchez
15:09:51 [Steven_]
Scribenick: John_Boyer
15:10:26 [ebruchez]
all, I am calling from my cell and will be in my car for ~15 mn, might be "listen-only" for that time
15:10:41 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Co-chair
15:10:50 [John_Boyer]
Finding co-chair in progress, two candidates
15:10:58 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Editorial Meeting
15:11:19 [John_Boyer]
Steven and Nick will be working in Amsterdam Wed and Thu next week
15:11:51 [John_Boyer]
Work Wednesday, bring issues to next call, then work Thursday
15:12:02 [John_Boyer]
Longer call next week, 2 hours, starting at normal time
15:13:33 [Steven]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2012Apr/0013.html
15:13:39 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Updating wikipedia pages
15:14:00 [John_Boyer]
Please check wikipedia pages in languages you understand
15:14:10 [John_Boyer]
update as necessary
15:14:43 [John_Boyer]
Leigh noticed that XForms is a Japanese international standard (JIS)
15:14:46 [nvdbleek]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2012Apr/0015.html
15:15:02 [John_Boyer]
(on Japanese wikipedia page)
15:15:46 [John_Boyer]
Action: Steven please add Michael Sperberg-McQueen's XForms course to News Items
15:15:47 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1886 - Please add Michael Sperberg-McQueen's XForms course to News Items [on Steven Pemberton - due 2012-04-18].
15:16:06 [John_Boyer]
Topic: Users community group
15:16:27 [John_Boyer]
Action: Steven please ask Leigh if he would be interested in chairing users community group
15:16:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1887 - Please ask Leigh if he would be interested in chairing users community group [on Steven Pemberton - due 2012-04-18].
15:16:53 [John_Boyer]
Alain: Leigh already tweeted about chairing this group
15:17:41 [nvdbleek]
https://twitter.com/#!/leighklotz/status/185033274500972544
15:18:20 [John_Boyer]
Nick: formally we have to vote but I don't mind if Leigh is chair
15:18:52 [John_Boyer]
Steven: +1
15:19:00 [John_Boyer]
John: +1
15:19:07 [John_Boyer]
Alain: I just voted for him
15:19:27 [John_Boyer]
Nick: There is a poll, I sent a link last week
15:19:48 [John_Boyer]
Alain: When you go to the page, it already says Leigh is chairing
15:20:08 [nvdbleek]
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Main_Page
15:20:49 [John_Boyer]
Action: Steven please add Community group link to working group home page
15:20:49 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1888 - Please add Community group link to working group home page [on Steven Pemberton - due 2012-04-18].
15:22:49 [John_Boyer]
Topic: XPath 2.0 bindings to atomic values
15:22:58 [Steven]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2012Apr/0010.html
15:23:37 [nvdbleek]
this is my reply http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2012Apr/0011.html
15:24:53 [John_Boyer]
John: In that email, Nick says UI bindings are not restricted, but I think they are. Did something get removed?
15:25:29 [Steven]
Scribe: Steven
15:25:43 [Steven]
Nick: I did a reading of the spec, and couldn't find any restrictions
15:25:46 [John_Boyer]
John: In input element for example http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#ui-input
15:25:53 [John_Boyer]
John: Data binding restruction
15:26:00 [John_Boyer]
s/restruction/restriction
15:26:04 [Steven]
ScribeNick: John_boyer
15:26:30 [Steven]
s/boyer/Boyer
15:26:38 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:26:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-minutes.html Steven
15:26:59 [John_Boyer]
John: Most ui elements have this data binding restriction that says what they can bind to
15:27:21 [Steven]
Chair: Steven
15:28:18 [John_Boyer]
John: Even though ref attr can now do Nodeset binding, the actual spec for input still says "Single node binding" so the ref will be boiled down to one node.
15:28:24 [Steven]
i/John: In input element for example/Scribenick: John_Boyer
15:28:32 [John_Boyer]
John: Then the data binding restriction says it has to be a leaf
15:29:07 [Steven]
Data Binding Restrictions: Binds to any simpleContent (except xsd:base64Binary, xsd:hexBinary or any datatype derived from these).
15:29:50 [ebruchez]
ebruchez has joined #forms
15:30:02 [Zakim]
- +1.650.919.aacc
15:30:45 [Zakim]
+ +1.650.919.aadd
15:30:52 [ebruchez]
zakim, +1.650.919.aadd is ebruchez
15:30:52 [Zakim]
+ebruchez; got it
15:31:28 [John_Boyer]
John: All the controls have these restrictions in XForms 1.1
15:31:53 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Yes I remember those, but question is whether or to what extent should be lifting those restrictions?
15:32:02 [John_Boyer]
Nick: Especially for repeats to repeat over sequences
15:32:53 [John_Boyer]
Erik: In our implementation we reached conclusion that we should throw an error if a repeat binds to a sequence 1 to 10. #1 it works out of the box, and #2 it was a good use case
15:33:13 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Not having this meant you had to do loops that generated instance values, very messy
15:33:27 [John_Boyer]
Erik: It is most useful for repeat
15:34:06 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Opens up what used to be a Nodeset binding to more interesting use cases, but it is less useful for single node bindings.
15:34:35 [John_Boyer]
s/useful for repeat/useful for repeat and itemset
15:35:05 [John_Boyer]
Erik: It could be useful for output element too, but not as big a requirement due to value attribute
15:35:24 [John_Boyer]
Nick: It makes some sense for a range control
15:35:50 [John_Boyer]
John: Really, where do you put the input result?
15:36:19 [John_Boyer]
Nick: It is useful reuse the range control to display a value but it behaves as if readonly
15:36:35 [John_Boyer]
Nick: Could be useful for custom controls too
15:36:54 [John_Boyer]
Erik: For implementer, better not to restrict because there is no benefit.
15:37:40 [John_Boyer]
Erik: You already have to support readonly controls, so there is no harm in binding in a readonly way to atomic values
15:38:07 [John_Boyer]
John: Benefits implementers, but does it benefit or is it a detraction to authors?
15:39:12 [John_Boyer]
Steven: are there any restrictions we should have?
15:39:31 [Steven_]
s/we should throw an error if a repeat/we should not throw an error if a repeat
15:40:30 [John_Boyer]
John: OK to lift restrictions as long as they are replaced with description of what the behavior would be, and so far the only stmt I've heard is that binding to things that aren't instance nodes means behave as readonly.
15:40:51 [John_Boyer]
John: Any other behavior comments needed?
15:40:57 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Something more to be said for repeats
15:41:00 [ebruchez]
http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#ui-repeat-processing
15:41:54 [John_Boyer]
Erik: We say what happens to repeat collections in terms of when you insert or delete instance data nodes, and that would have to be updated to account for things that are not nodes
15:42:38 [ebruchez]
repeat ref="1 to 10"
15:42:49 [ebruchez]
repeat ref="1 to 11"
15:42:49 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Also, unlike DOM nodes, atomic values can be identical without being the same object
15:43:19 [John_Boyer]
Erik: In above, the repeat object needs to be updated with the 11. The 1 to 10 are different objects but are identical
15:44:53 [John_Boyer]
Erik: If you implement XForms 1.1 already, it is not hard. If it is not a node, you just compare values.
15:45:04 [John_Boyer]
Steven: What happens in your implementation when it goes to 1 to 11?
15:45:27 [John_Boyer]
Erik: If the 1 to 10 are in same order, then those repeat objects aren't changed, and just one new repeat object shows up corresponding to 11
15:45:46 [John_Boyer]
Erik: If the sequence order changes, then more repeat objects get updated
15:46:12 [John_Boyer]
Steven: Nick is there any more info needed to update spec?
15:46:30 [John_Boyer]
Nick: We need a resolution on whether repeat and itemset can bind to atomic elements
15:46:46 [John_Boyer]
Nick: Need a separate one for whether other controls can bind to atomic values
15:47:29 [John_Boyer]
John: Do you also mean XForms bind too? or just repeat and itemset?
15:48:11 [John_Boyer]
Erik: We haven't done work on that?
15:48:26 [John_Boyer]
Steven: Perhaps it should be in bind too?
15:48:56 [John_Boyer]
Nick: We need to consider whether model item property attributes can result in atomic values too.
15:49:18 [John_Boyer]
Erik: that could be a binding exception
15:50:16 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Are you saying that we need to consider whether MIPs would attach to atomic values?
15:50:54 [John_Boyer]
John: No I misinterpreted what Nick was saying as the thing I was thinking about, which is that MIP expressions could result in an atomic values. The issue of attaching MIPs to an atomic value is separate
15:51:10 [John_Boyer]
Steven: What's the blocking issue?
15:51:28 [John_Boyer]
Erik: Can you write <bind ref="1 to 10" required="true()"/> ?
15:51:50 [John_Boyer]
Steven: OK so we need to decide whether to ignore it or throw an error.
15:53:02 [John_Boyer]
John: Also, can you say <bind ref="some/node" calculate="1 to 10"/>
15:54:43 [John_Boyer]
Nick: that will be a space-separated string with values from 1 to 10. the result, even if atomic, is converted to string for calculate or boolean for other MIPs like relevant
15:55:03 [John_Boyer]
Erik: It would be good if we could just point to XPath 2.0 to specify how the conversion happens
15:55:18 [John_Boyer]
Nick: We already say that, it is converted as if by calling boolean or string function
15:55:42 [Steven]
Proposal 1: Allow repeat/itemset etc to bind to literals
15:56:08 [Steven]
etc = wherever @nodeset is used
15:56:38 [Steven]
Proposal 2: When binding input etc controls to literals, the control becomes read-only
15:57:43 [Steven]
Proposal 3: When using <bind/> to bind to a literal, MIPS will be ignored
15:58:07 [Steven]
Proposal 4: When using <bind/> to bind to a literal, generate an exception
15:59:51 [John_Boyer]
John: etc is bad, need to look at all uses of nodeset, e.g. insert and delete
15:59:54 [Steven]
ISSUE: What to do with insert and delete on a literal
15:59:54 [trackbot]
Created ISSUE-1 - What to do with insert and delete on a literal ; please complete additional details at https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/xforms/issues/1/edit .
16:01:30 [John_Boyer]
RESOLUTION: Allow repeat/itemset and other uses of nodeset to bind to literals (some details still to be worked out, e.g. insert/delete)
16:02:06 [John_Boyer]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec the resolution to allow repeat, itemset and other uses of nodeset to bind to literals
16:02:07 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1889 - Implement in spec the resolution to allow repeat, itemset and other uses of nodeset to bind to literals [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2012-04-18].
16:02:33 [nvdbleek]
update  9.3.3 http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#ui-repeat-processing, section about bind,....
16:02:35 [John_Boyer]
RESOLUTION: When atomic form controls (e.g. input) bind to literals, they behave as readonly
16:03:14 [John_Boyer]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec "When atomic form controls (e.g. input) bind to literals, they behave as readonly"
16:03:16 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1890 - Implement in spec "When atomic form controls (e.g. input) bind to literals, they behave as readonly" [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2012-04-18].
16:03:43 [John_Boyer]
RESOLUTION: When using bind to bind to a literal, MIPs attached to literal generate a binding exception
16:04:19 [John_Boyer]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec "When using bind to bind to a literal, MIPs attach to literal generate a binding exception"
16:04:19 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-1891 - Implement in spec "When using bind to bind to a literal, MIPs attach to literal generate a binding exception" [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2012-04-18].
16:04:25 [Zakim]
-Steven
16:04:27 [Zakim]
-pfennell
16:04:28 [Zakim]
-nvdbleek
16:04:28 [Zakim]
-ebruchez
16:04:30 [Zakim]
-John_Boyer
16:04:31 [Zakim]
-alain
16:04:41 [Zakim]
IA_XForms()11:00AM has ended
16:04:45 [Zakim]
Attendees were +44.782.483.aaaa, alain, pfennell, Steven, +1.323.425.aabb, nvdbleek, John_Boyer, +1.650.919.aacc, ebruchez
16:04:45 [John_Boyer]
zakim, who is here?
16:05:00 [Zakim]
apparently IA_XForms()11:00AM has ended, John_Boyer
16:05:00 [alain]
alain has joined #forms
16:05:05 [John_Boyer]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:05:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-minutes.html John_Boyer
16:05:15 [Zakim]
On IRC I see alain, ebruchez, John_Boyer, Zakim, RRSAgent, Steven_, pfennell, Steven, nvdbleek, trackbot
16:05:57 [John_Boyer]
rrsagent, bye
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
I see 6 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-actions.rdf :
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steven please add Michael Sperberg-McQueen's XForms course to News Items [1]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T15-15-46
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steven please ask Leigh if he would be interested in chairing users community group [2]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T15-16-27
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steven please add Community group link to working group home page [3]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T15-20-49
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec the resolution to allow repeat, itemset and other uses of nodeset to bind to literals [4]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T16-02-06
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec "When atomic form controls (e.g. input) bind to literals, they behave as readonly" [5]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T16-03-14
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Nick to implement in spec "When using bind to bind to a literal, MIPs attach to literal generate a binding exception" [6]
16:05:57 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/04/11-forms-irc#T16-04-19