See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 22 October 2014
https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_2.0#Model_Item_Property_Definitions
Philip: Am I right that we are now allowed to bind to the same node several times.
Steven: Yes, that was a decision
we made.
... People were doing it anyway, so we decided to support
it.
... That's what ACTION-1979 is also about, because people are
not sure you should be allowed to combine types (too difficult
to do right)
... I think it is already widely implemented.
https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_2.0#The_XForms_Submission_Module
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0039.html
Steven: All my comments are
editorial, spelling, and here and there an error in the text of
an example.
... I'm just going to make the changes and people can look at
the diffs.
... but Erik and Alain have issues.
... Here is Erik's:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0039.html
... 1. Sections 5.2.4 xforms:dayTimeDuration and 5.2.5
xforms:yearMonthDuration:
... anyone know what the differences are?
... Erik suggests here there is a difference but I don't know
what they are.
... I guess we need more clarification.
... "2. In section 7.8 The header Element, we require the
nested <name> and
<value> elements. By analogy with <item>'s @name / @value, we should
also allow for @name / @value attributes.
"
Steven: I agree with this wholeheartedly
<nvdbleek> rssagent, pointe?
<scribe> ACTION: Steven to define header/@name @value [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1980 - Define header/@name @value [on Steven Pemberton - due 2014-10-29].
Steven: Next point,
https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_2.0#The_item_Element
... that looks editorial
<nvdbleek> http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/#yearMonthDuration
<nvdbleek> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#duration-subtypes
Nick: Going back to the Duration types, there may be a clash between using the schema type and the XPath type
Steven: Can you check it out for us Nick?
Nick: I'll do that
Steven: Then Alain's comment:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0041.html
... I remember there was an edge case from long ago
Nick: It is because on serialization you can't tell which namespaces might be needed.
Steven: What is your actual suggestion, Alain?
Alain: I want to know how other
implementations handle this.
... in particular whether the XForms declaration is
included.
Steven: You are only talking about the default behaviour, right Alain?
Alain: Yes. I suggest we leave out the XForms namespace as a default
Nick: I don't think this would cause any problems.
Steven: It would cause a problem if you had a form generating a form
<nvdbleek> <xf:instance>
<nvdbleek> <data><boe myattr=“xf:foo”/></data>
<nvdbleek> </xf:instance>
Alain: If the data contains XForms elements then the namespace would be required, and supplied.
Nick: That example would
break
... not sure if anyone uses it.
Steven: Do we make the change.
Nick: Harmless; is it worth the effort for other implementations?
<scribe> ACTION: Steven to update section 7. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1981 - Update section 7. [on Steven Pemberton - due 2014-10-29].
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0013.html
Steven: I am heartened by the
replies people have been sending.
... Thanks Alain for pointing it out.
... I intende to send a reply to the AB, and ask for a
definition of 'failure'.
... At the time of closing of XHTML2, the membership had voted
and placed it as 12th most important technology in W3C.
... it was closed despite that
... the XHTML2 features were spread over other groups, such as
RDFa
... and with so many active implementations of XForms, it is
hard to see it as a failure.
... Unless they are measuring it as "implemented in
browser".
... I think the AB should take a broader view
Philip: It seems like the AB have not understood how technologies are implemented now.
Steven: I shall write to the AB and tell them that the Forms community don't agree with this characterisation, and send them some examples of where it is used.
types problem
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0037.html
Steven: Erik's suggestion is to take "last type bind wins" approach, but points out that this allows dynamic typing.
Nick: In XForms, we currently say
that textual order of binds is not important, but based on
dependency graph.
... So I don't like changing that.
Philip: The order shouldn't be
important from a user's point of view
... so there's a dilemma
... I don't like 1) Least specific type
Steven: We could disallowm and give a binding error event (or is it an exception?)
<nvdbleek> In the previous version http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms20/#The_xforms-binding-exception_Event we only had a binding-exception and no binding-error
Steven: Oh wait, we use both
Nick: Must be old text; it should be "error" not "exception".
<scribe> ACTION: Steven to check that bind-exception is no longer used. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1982 - Check that bind-exception is no longer used. [on Steven Pemberton - due 2014-10-29].
Nick: What happens with model bindings that used to generate a bind-exception.
Steven: You get the default model
then I suppose
... or carry on as if @model isn't there.
Nick: we need to specify it; make a decision in every place where we changed exception to error.
Steven: Can I ask you to collect those together?
Nick: Yes.
<scribe> ACTION: Nick to work out what we should do in cases where we have changed bind-exception to bind-error [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1983 - Work out what we should do in cases where we have changed bind-exception to bind-error [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2014-10-29].
http://www.w3.org/2014/11/TPAC/
Meeting 31 Oct, modulo Erik's Halloween march
Nick: Where are we meeting?
Steven: Let's work that out when we get there.
Nick: I'll be there from Saturday
Steven: I arrive Monday evening
[ADJOURN]
<scribe> ACTION: Nick to summarise Duration types clashes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-1984 - Summarise duration types clashes [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2014-10-29].
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/anone/anyone/ Succeeded: s/nant/ant/ Succeeded: s/SO/So/ Succeeded: s/teh/the/ Succeeded: s/nant/ant/ No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: Steven Inferring Scribes: Steven Default Present: pfennell, Steven, [IPcaller], nvdbleek Present: pfennell Steven [IPcaller] nvdbleek Alain Regrets: Erik(possibly) Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2014Oct/0040 Found Date: 22 Oct 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/10/22-forms-minutes.html People with action items: nick steven[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]