XForms Users Community Group Teleconference -- 30 Sep 2015

<trackbot> Date: 30 September 2015

XForms day 5th Nov

[No link]

Steven: The event is coming on nicely, 4 varied speakers at present.

Editing

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2015Jul/0005.html

Steven: No progress to report. You're still having trouble Erik?

Erik: Yes, I've sent a message to Liam

public-xformsusers

[No link]

Steven: Nothing to report. I think next week Mark will join us on the call.

JSON-to-XML and CSV-to-XML mappings in XForms 2.0

[No link]

Steven: Not sure what to do about this.
... Let's research this week and talk about it next.

Erik; Sure

Comments on Delete action

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2015Sep/0010.html

"1. "The delete action is terminated with no effect if the delete context is

the empty sequence."

Erik: I reread this section, and found some surprises for me.
... some are more important than others
... This is a change since XForms 1.1, the context attribute is now very general.
... (Delete actually uses it in a different way, but that's another topic)

<ebruchez> <delete

<ebruchez> context="()"

<ebruchez> ref="instance('my-instance')/bar"/>

Steven: Step 2 already says there is no effect if the binding gives no nodes

Erik: If foo is empty, then so is bar.

Steven: Then let's delete the sentence from step 1

Nick: This was for XPath 1

Erik: I remember Michael Kaye saying something about this.
... in XPath 1 there may be no way of doing this, and that would be the reason for having this sentence.

Steven: So the sentence is there to stop XPath 1 implementations from throwing an error
... Can we express it in a generic way so that it doesn't matter which version of XPath we use.
... Such as in step 2 "If the expression uses the context and the context is empty, then terminate with no effect".

Erik: It would introduce an theoretical incompatibility.
... I am split. I am OK to leave this for now.

2. "The behavior of the delete action is undefined if the Sequence Binding

node-sequence contains nodes from more than one instance"

Erik: I don't know why this written this way.
... I don't see why it wouldn't delete from both instances.

<ebruchez> <delete

<ebruchez> ref="instance('my-instance')/bar, instance('your-instance')/baz"/>

Nick: Maybe XPath 1 again?

Erik: You would be very unlikely to do this in XForms 1.1

<ebruchez> XPath 1.0: ref="instance('my-instance')/bar | instance('your-instance')/baz"/>

Steven: Is there any reason to exclude elements from more than one instance?

[No]

Steven: Let's remove this restriction then.

3. "Otherwise, the Sequence Binding is not expressed, so the Sequence

Binding node-sequence is set equal to the delete context node with a

position and size of 1."

Erik: So there is no ref and bind, so we delete the context node. Why?

Nick: The first one would work in a delete

Steven: I agree it's better to be explicit

Nick: Or an iterate action

Erik: Either remove this or provide examples.

Steven: I propose we remove it.

Erik: It's true it would be backwards incompatible.

Steven: IS it generally true that no ref means ref="."?

Erik: Not as far as I am aware.

Steven: <repeat ref="foo"><output/></repeat>
... is not allowed AFAIK

Nick: I would prefer that we kept it as is, and added an example
... Alain what does your implementation do?

Alain: I'll check.

Erik: I would argue for being more explicit.

Steven: I support that, but I would never have written it without ref.

Erik: We could deprecate it.

Steven: That's a perfectly acceptable path.

Nick: I think that's better.

Erik: I support that.

Alain: I think that's better.

<scribe> ACTION: Erik to deprecate <delete> without a node binding [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/09/30-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2031 - Deprecate <delete> without a node binding [on Erik Bruchez - due 2015-10-07].

<scribe> ACTION: Erik to allow delete on multiple instances [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/09/30-forms-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2032 - Allow delete on multiple instances [on Erik Bruchez - due 2015-10-07].

4. cannot delete "namespace node"?

Erik: I'm not sure about this one.
... not sure if we can solve it live.
... I think we support deleting them
... in fact we even have a use case.

Nick: We use XPath model, not a DOM model

<ebruchez> http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel/#NamespaceNode

Steven: Can I ask all implementations to check what would happen in this case?

"5. We must add what to do if the sequence points to some atomic values. We

should say that those are ignored just as readonly items are.

Steven: Let's do the namespace nodes next week.

Erik: It wasn't originally written with atomic values in mind. I think we should add a sentence clarifying.

<scribe> ACTION: Erik to add clarification about deleting atomic values [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/09/30-forms-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2033 - Add clarification about deleting atomic values [on Erik Bruchez - due 2015-10-07].

[ADJOURN]

- DRAFT -

XForms Users Community Group Teleconference

30 Sep 2015

Attendees

Contents

XForms day 5th Nov

Editing

public-xformsusers

JSON-to-XML and CSV-to-XML mappings in XForms 2.0

Comments on Delete action

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output