W3C

- DRAFT -

XForms Users Community Group Teleconference

29 Mar 2017

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
Alain, Erik, Philip, Steven
Regrets
Chair
Steven
Scribe
Steven

Contents


xf:submission/@relevant proposal

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0020

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0028.html

Steven: Did you see Philip's question?

Erik: Let me give an example (if I can think of one)

<ebruchez> <visa>some text<number/>M</visa>

Erik: <visa> is non relevant
... but it is complex
... you can't bind to the text of visa, so should it also be emptied?
... (because there are no empty text nodes, so the control would become nonrelevant henceforth)

Steven: Do you have a use-case why it *shouldn't* be emptied?

Erik: I don't think so.
... Though there might be whitespace between elements, which would get lost

<pfennell> If visa of <visa><number>123456</number></visa> is made non-relevant by an action will number lose it's text node? If number is of type xs:integer then that empty node would raise a validation error.

Philip: If the number got emptied it wouldn;t validate on the service side

Steven: That would be your own responsibility.
... emptying the fields is an acceptable usecase; I've needed it myself in the past.
... I proposed nonrelevant="keep|remove|empty"

Alain: Fine

Philip: OK

Erik: OK

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to add @nonrelevant according to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0021.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2115 - Add @nonrelevant according to https://lists.w3.org/archives/public/public-xformsusers/2017mar/0021.html [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].

Deferred updates

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0022

Steven: Point one, does it need to be done with an event?

Erik: I've never liked this.

Steven: I'll investigate getting rid of those events during processing.
... Point two, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0023.html
... His point seems to be that these details don't need to be exposed in the spec

Erik: If you do two setvalues after each other, there is no recalculation between the two
... Similarly to the UI, but that may be less of a problem.
... The alternative would be to have all actions cause an update

Steven: Isn't it the case that this only arises in an action?
... if we just said that the model doesn't get updated until the end of an action, we wouldn't need to describe it with the deferred update mechanism.

Erik: I wonder if Michael's question is just about that.

Steven: It seems if we could express it without saying how, only what you want to happen, it would be more along our lines of working anyway
... I'll look at it this week, and see what can be done to simplify it.

Serialization as multipart/related

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0024

Steven: I don't know how much multipart/ is used

Alain: Nor do I

Erik: Would this be possible in a web browser?

Alain: I think so.

Steven: Shal we give it a try?

s/shal/shall/

Steven: or is it not important enough?

Philip: Give it a try.

Erik: I think people try to avoid it
... but I think it is implemented on servers
... It is a complication
... but it is how browsers might send multiple uploads
... I have no good feel, but I would like to have something like this.
... It is still a 'thing'.

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to spec up <part/> proposal. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2116 - Spec up <part/> proposal. [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].

Steven: AOB

[None]

[ADJOURN]

<scribe> ACTION: Steven to investigate removing the need for deferred update flags [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2117 - Investigate removing the need for deferred update flags [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Steven to add @nonrelevant according to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0021.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Steven to investigate removing the need for deferred update flags [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Steven to spec up <part/> proposal. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html#action02]
 

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/03/29 13:41:11 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/tion/tion?/
Succeeded: s/;/'/
Succeeded: s/set value/setvalue/
Succeeded: s/adte/date/
FAILED: s/shal/shall/
Present: Alain Erik Philip Steven
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Steven
Inferring Scribes: Steven
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0025
Found Date: 29 Mar 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html
People with action items: steven

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]