XForms Users Community Group Teleconference -- 09 Nov 2016

StackOverflow answer

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Oct/0077

Steven: I added an answer as well.

Model Item Properties

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0023.html

Steven: OK that I delete "in document order"?

Erik: I think so.

Steven: will do

switch case selection

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0026.html

Steven: I'm assuming we're OK with using the same rules for initialisation and subsequent redisplay

Erik: Yes.

toggle

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0029.html

Steven: I guess we're agreed here.
... I will update the spec to make it clearer

The copy Element (for itemset)

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0022.html

Steven: I think that we should send it to the selection control, since that is where the error actually is. Do we agree?

Erik: I agree.

Steven: Any objections?

Philip: Fine.

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to make <copy> error event go to selection element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/11/09-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2088 - Make <copy> error event go to selection element [on Steven Pemberton - due 2016-11-16].

Steven: Point 2. I think this is wrong

Erik: I agree

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to delete xforms-binding-error Event for different models from <copy> [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/11/09-forms-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2089 - Delete xforms-binding-error event for different models from <copy> [on Steven Pemberton - due 2016-11-16].

Extension functions

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0024.html

Steven: Just wanted to check we were OK with the example I added

Erik: Seems fine

The group module

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0025.html

Steven: I personally feel that it's not worth having group and repeat modules
... furthermore I think they should both be in "full"

Erik: There is more of an argument for repeat, but I don't see any good argument for leaving it from "full"

https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XForms_2.0#Conformance_Levels

Steven: I think they ought to be "musts" except for "except that support of the repeat-* attributes is optional."

Erik: Sure

Steven: OK?

Philip: Yep.

Alain: Yes.

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to update XForms Full definition [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/11/09-forms-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2090 - Update xforms full definition [on Steven Pemberton - due 2016-11-16].

switch@caseref

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Nov/0027.html

Steven: As you point out Erik, there is no backwards compatibility issue

Erik: Because we changed from @id to @name

Steven: So is everyone OK with using @ref instead of @caseref

Alain: no problem.

Philip: I'm OK

Erik: I'm OK

RESOLUTION: remove @caseref and use @ref instead

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to remove @caseref [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/11/09-forms-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2091 - Remove @caseref [on Steven Pemberton - due 2016-11-16].

Select element

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2016Oct/0068.html

Steven: So what do you think about the idea of allowing different separators for <select> data?

Erik: It might cause problems with itemset
... It's not a bad idea, though it might not cover everything, since if you have unknown values, your separator might be there
... you might be able to use URL encoding, but maybe that's going too far.
... maybe we don't need to solve the problem perfectly.

Alain: Would it be a MIP?

Steven: Interesting question
... I see what you mean, it is more a property of the data, rather than the control.
... Needs thinking about. Let's not yet make a decision.

AOB

Steven: There will be an XForms Day in Amsterdam in May

[ADJOURN]

- DRAFT -

XForms Users Community Group Teleconference

09 Nov 2016

Attendees

Contents