See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 27 November 2013
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0013.html
Steven: About 25 people were
there, Dutch language
... several high points
... was v successful
... nice to see Nick's implementation running on an iphone
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0016.html
Steven: I think you were right not to link all 91 occurrences
Erik: Don't know why the diff doesn't work
Nick: maybe a timeout in the diff
process.
... we have a really big page.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0017.html
Erik: There is more work left for the dialog events
Nick: I'm planning to do it.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0018.html
Erik: Fairly
straightforward
... There was some text not compatible with XPath 2
... there were 4 places with the same big chunk of text, which
I just removed
... (see the diff)
Nick: there may be impact on other places.
Erik: There might be; I didn't
check section 4.
... there are 39 occurrences that may still need to be
changed.
Nick: [uses an example from linking error events]
Erik: I would rather use the model attribute
Nick: But that is not how it is specified
Erik: Perhaps we should change it
<ebruchez> Current text: "To rebuild a model other than the one associated with the in-scope evaluation context node, the model attribute from the Common group can be used since it changes the in-scope evaluation context node."
Erik: In XForms 1.1 saying that
you use model related to the current context node
... is no longer entirely true
... because of variables
<nvdbleek> <xf:var name="my-var" value="foo" model="model-2"/>
<nvdbleek> <xf:repeat ref="$my-var" model="model-1">
Erik: If we need to identify an implicit model, the spec says how to do that, but it would be easier to use static definitions
<nvdbleek> <!-- inscope model is model-2 NOT model-1 -->
Erik: such as @model
<nvdbleek> <xf:var name="my-var" value="foo" model="model-2"/>
<nvdbleek> <xf:repeat ref="$my-var" model="model-1">
<nvdbleek> <!-- inscope model is model-2 NOT model-1 -->
<nvdbleek> </xf:repeat>
Steven: If this is going to be a problem we definitely need a proposal to fix it
Erik: I can write a proposal
<scribe> ACTION: Erik to propose how to fix the implicit model identification with context nodes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/11/27-forms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1959 - Propose how to fix the implicit model identification with context nodes [on Erik Bruchez - due 2013-12-04].
<nvdbleek> Eriks dynamic inscope model example:
<nvdbleek> <xf:var name="node-model1" value="foo" model="model-1"/>
<nvdbleek> <xf:var name="node-model2" value="foo" model="model-2"/>
<nvdbleek> <xf:var name="my-var" value="if (foo = 'bar') then $node-model1 else node-model2" model="model-2"/>
<nvdbleek> <xf:repeat ref="$my-var" model="model-3">
<nvdbleek> <!-- inscope model is either model-1 or model-2 depending on the value of node 'foo' -->
<nvdbleek> </xf:repeat>
three options for variable type handling
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0015.html
Erik: I'm done with the error
handling
... with two that do still stop processing.
... * xforms-compute-exception
... I changed the *must* to a *should* since we describe what
to do if it is not the case.
Steven: Does anyone here implement @functions?
Erik: It was in 1.1
Nick: Therefore there was an implementation
Steven: It's there to warn a processor about what the needs of a form are.
Nick: The links to the implementation reports are broken!
Steven: Oh. That's bad.
<nvdbleek> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/
<nvdbleek> eg: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2008/XForms11ImplReports/UbiquityIE7/ResultsTable.html
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2008/XForms11ImplReports/UbiquityIE7/
Access problems with this: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2008/XForms11ImplReports/EMC/ResultsTable.html
<unl> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2008/XForms11ImplReports/results.htm
There is a test they all passed: 7.12a
Nick: The test says that a forms-compute-exception must be given
Erik: So they did implement that.
<scribe> ACTION: Steven to fix broken links to test reports [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/11/27-forms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1960 - Fix broken links to test reports [on Steven Pemberton - due 2013-12-04].
Erik: So should we just leave this? It's not very useful. A related point is xforms-binding-exception
Steven: Link?
<ebruchez> http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#conform-levels-full
<nvdbleek> notes that all the implementation reports are still on the w3c server (at least in CVS), but I have no idea what is wrong with the access rights
Steven: Why on earth did we decide to disallow groups?
Erik: Don't know.
... Group, switch and repeat are optional
... I think this section doesn't make sense any more.
... There may be some reason to keep the "model" conformance
level, but if we keep it, "full" should make everything
required
... but in any case we can get rid of the reuirement to
dispatch "xforms-binding-exception" if you don't implement
parts.
Steven: I agree
s/eru/requ/
Erik: If there is anything that makes sense, it is not to require schema support.
Steven: Let's make a
proposal
... 1. Drop the 'should's from full, and make everything
required
... 2. Keep 'model' conformance
... 3. Add 'basic' conformance, which just makes schemas
optional;
<ebruchez> http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms-basic/
Steven: http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#fn-property
... has "full" and "basic" but not "model"
... Proposal:
... 1. Drop the 'should's from full, and make everything
required
... 2. Add 'basic' conformance, which just makes schemas
optional;
... 3. Keep 'model' conformance
... 4. Add "model" as a level to http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#fn-property
... Objections?
Nick: What about the repeat-* attributes
Erik: They are not
required.
... but optional
Steven: "The XForms Processor
must process all Schemas listed in this attribute."
... thats on @schema on model.
... so it does say "must"
RESOLUTION: 1. Drop
the 'should's from full, and make everything
required
... 2. Add 'basic' conformance, which just makes schemas
optional;
... 3. Keep 'model' conformance
... 4. Add "model" as a level to http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#fn-property
<scribe> ACTION: Steven to implement the conformance level resolution agreed 2013-11-27 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/11/27-forms-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1961 - Implement the conformance level resolution agreed 2013-11-27 [on Steven Pemberton - due 2013-12-04].
[ADJOURN]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/x// Succeeded: s/ eis/e is/ Succeeded: s/ f/f/ Succeeded: s/fun/sunc/ Succeeded: s/sunc/func/ Succeeded: s/are./of a form are./ FAILED: s/eru/requ/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Steven Inferring Scribes: Steven Default Present: [IPcaller], Steven, nvdbleek, ebruchez, unl Present: [IPcaller] Steven nvdbleek ebruchez unl Regrets: Philip Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Nov/0020 Found Date: 27 Nov 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/11/27-forms-minutes.html People with action items: erik steven[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]