IRC log of forms on 2007-09-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:23:27 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #forms
07:23:27 [RRSAgent]
logging to
07:23:34 [Steven]
rrsagent, make log public
07:23:53 [Steven]
Meeting: Forms WG FtF, Madrid Spain, Day 3 of 3
07:24:02 [Steven]
Chair: John
07:24:34 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
07:25:12 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:25:12 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
07:25:36 [Steven]
-> Day 1
07:25:48 [Steven]
-> Day 2
07:26:09 [Steven]
Scribe: Steven
07:26:45 [ebruchez]
ebruchez has joined #forms
07:27:12 [Steven]
07:27:18 [Rafael]
Rafael has joined #forms
07:27:53 [Steven]
Steven has changed the topic to: Forms FtF, Madrid Spain, Agenda:
07:28:36 [Steven]
Topic: Are readonly and other MIPs properties or enforced rules? (Issue 176)
07:28:39 [John_Boyer];user=guest;selectid=176;statetype=-1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
07:28:43 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
07:28:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
07:29:14 [Charlie]
Charlie has joined #forms
07:29:20 [Steven]
Present: John, Uli, Charlie, Steven, Erik, Nick, Rafael, Rogelio
07:31:11 [Roger]
Roger has joined #forms
07:33:24 [Steven]
John: We need to make a choice
07:34:32 [Steven]
... non-relevant nodes are allowed to be set witha setvalue' how aout readonly?
07:34:43 [Steven]
s/witha/with a/
07:34:54 [Steven]
07:35:45 [Steven]
John: Apparently setting a non-relevant node doesn't break the model encapsulation
07:35:51 [Steven]
... but readonly does
07:36:57 [Steven]
... so the choice is saying the model creates a readonly property that nothing else is allowed to violate
07:37:30 [Steven]
... or only an annotation that affects the controls
07:39:30 [Steven]
STeven: It seems like we have two cow paths here, only one of which can be paved
07:39:41 [Steven]
... we need to choose the one that does the least damage
07:39:55 [Steven]
CHarlie: Or restricts our future movements the least
07:40:00 [Steven]
07:40:14 [ebruchez]
07:40:39 [Steven]
07:41:17 [Steven]
John: We want readonly at the control level as well in the future
07:41:18 [Charlie]
I'm more focused on trying to move us in the direction we intuit now will be the correct future direction, vs. just avoiding restricting our future options.
07:42:04 [Steven]
John: But if we want to encpsulate the model, we can call it something else
07:42:11 [MarkS]
MarkS has joined #forms
07:42:53 [Steven]
07:43:15 [Steven]
CHarliue: There is an inconsistency between allowing calculate on readonly, but not a setvalue
07:43:23 [Steven]
07:43:33 [ebruchez]
07:44:04 [Steven]
Nick: It is about model encapsulation
07:44:15 [Steven]
Charlie: Sounds like splitting hairs
07:44:22 [Rafael]
Rafael has joined #forms
07:44:52 [Steven]
Erik: We want to provide the model with behaviour that extends the binds and so on
07:45:56 [Steven]
Charlie: I want to do with script what I can do with constraints
07:46:25 [ebruchez]
scribe: ebruchez
07:47:08 [ebruchez]
John: Other example why MIPs are annotations consumed by other models is the definition: "An XForms-specific annotation to an instance data node"
07:47:26 [ebruchez]
Nick: It's an annotation for the model.
07:47:43 [ebruchez]
Nick: It's not a contradition, it depends who consumes it.
07:48:27 [ebruchez]
Charlie: What bugs me is the asymmetry between @calculate and setvalue.
07:48:49 [ebruchez]
Nick: @calculate coud call script via custom XPath functions.
07:48:55 [ebruchez]
John: Ouch.
07:50:47 [ebruchez]
Erik: Somtimes you want to use @calculate, sometimes setvalue.
07:50:57 [ebruchez]
Charlie: I am still bothered by the asymmetry.
07:51:22 [ebruchez]
07:51:23 [Rafa]
Rafa has joined #forms
07:53:07 [ebruchez]
Mark S., John is suggesting a straw poll.
08:02:04 [ebruchez]
John: So we have 5 in favor of readonly impacting actions, and 3 in favor of not.
08:02:15 [ebruchez]
Charlie: I don't think the straw poll is sufficient to decide.
08:02:22 [MarkS]
that is too bad
08:02:26 [ebruchez]
Steven: So what do you suggest we decide?
08:02:41 [MarkS]
it sounds like this is just too big for 1.1
08:02:42 [ebruchez]
s/what do you/how do you
08:03:03 [ebruchez]
Nick: Would be better just to leave things as they are for 1.1, i.e. vague.
08:03:30 [ebruchez]
Steven: I feel for Nick because he has forms that would break if we decide not to enforce readonly in actions.
08:03:52 [Steven]
but I believe that the other option is the path if least damage
08:03:59 [Steven]
08:04:01 [ebruchez]
John: But he can use the @version attribute to decide what behavior to implement, so that's ok.
08:04:47 [MarkS]
so you consign some people to never go to 1.1
08:04:54 [ebruchez]
Steven: I don't agree with the comment that @version solves the problem.
08:05:03 [ebruchez]
Nick: It means we can't move to 1.1.
08:05:35 [ebruchez]
John: If you are upgrading the form, you can make the changes to have the same functionality. It's not impossible, just "interesting".
08:06:51 [ebruchez]
Nick: readonly makes the whole subtree readonly, and it is hard to rewrite certain XPath expressions.
08:07:05 [ebruchez]
John: I think there exists a way, for every form, to make it work.
08:08:37 [MarkS]
but if you have a schema with a fixed value, do you expect to be able to override that?
08:09:13 [MarkS]
what about the model author who is not a form author?
08:09:25 [ebruchez]
Nick: I am not sure we can generate the XPath.
08:09:50 [ebruchez]
Erik: I find it funny that you can write setvalue or insert and sometimes they do somthing, sometimes they NOP.
08:09:59 [ebruchez]
08:10:27 [ebruchez]
John: I agree w/ Erik, [...].
08:10:38 [ebruchez]
Nick: Separation of model vs. UI authoring is nice.
08:10:39 [MarkS]
Origo creates models for others to consume
08:10:49 [MarkS]
it does not create forms
08:10:52 [MarkS]
others do that
08:11:06 [MarkS]
he expects redonly to be honoured
08:11:09 [ebruchez]
John: You can still have a model author, it's just what you expect for readonly.
08:11:14 [MarkS]
no, he means that a node is readonly
08:11:58 [MarkS]
no, actions are just actions, surely?
08:12:00 [ebruchez]
John: What you could say is that actions within the model are part of the model.
08:12:21 [MarkS]
that is just the syntax, surely
08:12:46 [MarkS]
if you can get the events outside the model, then you can put the actions outside the model
08:12:55 [MarkS]
I would prefer that myself
08:13:38 [MarkS]
I think we have good use cases for both kinds of readonly
08:13:44 [MarkS]
and we can't really do either
08:14:22 [ebruchez]
Erik: If the behavior is in the model, then I don't see why the model author can't use setvalue.
08:14:39 [MarkS]
well I do :-)
08:15:36 [ebruchez]
Nick: We have lots of NOPs.
08:15:53 [Charlie]
I've changed my straw-poll vote to the hint-only option.
08:16:42 [MarkS]
then for consistancy things like type should jut be a hint too
08:16:54 [MarkS]
08:17:27 [MarkS]
If we don't know how the model works, how can anyone else be expected to understand?
08:17:45 [ebruchez]
Erik: I don't think we do, here setvalue can work, but it will NOPs. It's very hard to debug. It should maybe stop XForms processing then.
08:18:21 [ebruchez]
John: New straw poll shows 5 to 4 in favor of enforcing readonly.
08:18:38 [ebruchez]
Steven: We need to see who can live with either.
08:18:52 [MarkS]
08:18:58 [MarkS]
do what?
08:19:09 [ebruchez]
repeat your opinion do the IRC
08:19:09 [MarkS]
I can't live with 2
08:19:18 [MarkS]
I will die
08:19:21 [MarkS]
08:19:39 [Steven]
Is MarkB here?
08:20:52 [ebruchez]
Erik: If we do enforce, it's going to be a lot of work for 1.1.
08:20:57 [MarkS]
I still think we need mechanisms to give readonly in the sense Nick and I want, and in the sense that Erik wants, (but not contradicting model readonly)
08:21:08 [MarkS]
there are good reasons for both
08:21:32 [ebruchez]
Steven: (...)
08:21:59 [MarkS]
I can't hear John
08:22:07 [MarkS]
and I miss his soothing voice
08:22:12 [Steven]
I said: If we don't decide now, then we have to advise authors to assume case 1)
08:22:25 [Steven]
since that includes 2) (and not vice versa)
08:23:24 [ebruchez]
John: Option 1 is heavier, but we may have to go with it.
08:24:48 [Steven]
If we adopt 1) then to do setvalue on a readonly you have to have a calculate that says it is the same as another (non-readonly) value, and do your setvalues on that one
08:25:43 [ebruchez]
Erik: If we do 1), then we have the issue of MIP staleness.
08:25:56 [ebruchez]
Nick: You could disable deferred updates.
08:26:14 [ebruchez]
Uli: You can leave things out of action blocks.
08:27:23 [ebruchez]
John: It isn't a big problem to me to make the notes everywhere to explain how this works. If we choose 1), I would like the latitude to write these notes.
08:27:29 [MarkS]
MarkB, you are making funny noises
08:27:58 [ebruchez]
Erik: Sure but it's a lot of complexity.
08:28:16 [MarkS]
what is a lot of complexity?
08:28:23 [MarkS]
what are you talking about now?
08:29:38 [ebruchez]
Proposed resolution: Readonly is an inviolate property of the model that other modules (including actions in the model) cannot ignore. Various spec edits will make that clear.
08:30:13 [MarkS]
08:30:15 [ebruchez]
Uli:What about instance replacement?
08:31:14 [ebruchez]
John: Submission is IMO separate so will enforce readonly as well.
08:32:42 [ebruchez]
RESOLUTION: Readonly is an inviolate property of the model that other modules (including actions in the model) cannot ignore. Various spec edits will make that clear.
08:33:16 [ebruchez]
ACTION: jboyer to make spec changes saying that readonly is an inviolate property of the model that other modules (including actions in the model) cannot ignore. Various spec edits will make that clear.
08:33:20 [Steven]
08:34:03 [ebruchez]
ACTION: nick to create samples illustrating how readonly affects insert and delete.
08:34:13 [ebruchez]
ACTION: nick to create samples illustrating how readonly affects instance replacement.
08:34:18 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-409 - Make spec changes saying that readonly is an inviolate property of the model that other modules (including actions in the model) cannot ignore. Various spec edits will make that clear. [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
08:35:15 [ebruchez]
Nick: We will need UI readonly in 1.2 or 2.0.
08:35:43 [MarkS]
08:41:48 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
08:41:54 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
08:46:02 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
08:48:25 [Nick]
TOPIC: Issue 28
08:48:34 [Nick];user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
08:48:35 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
08:48:47 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
08:50:16 [Nick]
John: When you are in the model you need to go up one level at least
08:50:35 [Nick]
John: We solved the problem for setvalue with the context() function
08:51:41 [Nick]
John: We can defer this to a feature version
08:51:52 [Nick]
08:52:47 [Nick]
John: We could use the context attribute
08:53:45 [Nick]
Nick: It is prob. in the scope of XForms 1.2
08:55:08 [Nick]
John: Agrees that we need a simpler version, but that it is in scope of XForms 1.2
08:56:06 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: Defer issue 28 to XForms 1.2;user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
08:56:25 [Nick]
TOPIC: constrain revalidation?
08:56:51 [ebruchez2]
ebruchez2 has joined #forms
08:57:47 [Nick]
John: Write erata change revalidate only validates simple datatypes, and do structaral validation on submit
08:58:05 [Nick]
Erik: I don't know how we can implement this
08:58:57 [Nick]
08:59:33 [Nick]
John: You can do only datatype revalidation by doing full revalidation and only take the datatype errors into account
08:59:51 [Nick]
John: or only do it node by node
09:00:31 [Nick]
Uli: If you do structaral validation how do you report errors where no controls are bound to
09:01:51 [Nick]
Erik: In schema you have the notion of all= strict,skip, in xslt2 they go furture they added lax
09:02:56 [Nick]
Erik: It is hard to only validate dataypes
09:03:26 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
09:03:36 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
09:03:38 [Nick]
John: You can look to the schema as type mips
09:07:21 [Nick]
s/In schema you have the notion of all= strict,skip, in xslt2 they go furture they added lax/In schema you have the notion of all= strict,skip, lax in xslt2 they go furture they added other modes/
09:07:28 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
09:07:34 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
09:08:14 [Nick]
Erik: talks about schema processors and xslt 2.0
09:09:07 [Nick]
John: We can deal with performance, because you know the change, so you could skip instances based on this
09:09:13 [ebruchez2]
I was saying that XML schema defines xsd:any with lax/strict/any processing, and XSLT 2.0 takes this one step further by providing access to these to the styleshet author.
09:10:23 [Nick]
Erik: If you have REST you have a lot of instances for those requests
09:11:15 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
09:11:16 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
09:11:37 [Nick]
John: Maybe you don't attach schema to the 'important' instances
09:12:02 [Nick]
S/Maybe you don't attach schema to the 'important' instances/ Maybe you only attach schema to the 'important' instances
09:13:26 [Nick]
Proposed resoution: Shoot action 2006-05-31.5
09:13:37 [trackbot-ng]
trackbot-ng has joined #forms
09:13:43 [trackbot-ng]
Tracking ISSUEs and ACTIONs from
09:14:42 [Nick]
Uli: schema can modify the document while validating, e.g.: add default values
09:15:56 [Nick]
Uli: so you maybe need recalculate and rebuild after a revalidate
09:18:17 [Nick]
Erik: We don't enforce the validity
09:21:13 [Nick]
John: The order of validating MIPS and schema validation is important
09:21:33 [Nick]
Erik: schema validation should be ran before MIPS
09:22:58 [Nick]
John: I think schema validation should not modify the dom
09:23:08 [Nick]
John: can we shoot the action item
09:24:29 [Nick]
Erik: We don't specify clearly how validation should be performed, taking into account all the corner cases, but this should be done in the future
09:30:22 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: We shoot action 2006-05-31.5
09:31:04 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: Group and switch are valid targets for MIP events
09:31:28 [Nick]
ACTION: Johnb Update spec to reflect that group and switch are valid targets for MIP events
09:31:28 [trackbot-ng]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Johnb
09:33:31 [Nick]
John: Controls do nothing with read-only MIP on group
09:34:47 [Nick]
John: Controls do something with relevant MIP on group
09:37:35 [Nick]
Roger: Maybe we need two things for 'UI level MIPS' and MIPs
09:38:20 [unl]
09:39:21 [Nick]
John: Still agree on prev. resolution
09:42:20 [Nick]
TOPIC: Things wrong with 7.5
09:42:29 [Nick];user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
09:42:57 [Nick];user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
09:42:57 [Nick];user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1
09:46:49 [John_Boyer]
28<;user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1> rn
09:47:11 [John_Boyer]
09:48:00 [Nick]
Erik: We have two issues first is of Michael, and the 5 other points
09:49:24 [Nick]
Erik: we start with issue 142
09:50:11 [Nick]
Erik: We need a clarification, and I should propose some text for the spec
09:50:49 [Nick]
John: The restriction is that the form will not work well if you use dynamic dependencies
09:52:27 [Nick]
Erik: More advanced implementation can process can do beter and proces some/all dynamic dependencies
09:53:23 [Nick]
John: The dependency list is changing by value changes if the parameters of id are not fixed
09:55:38 [Nick]
erik: gives simple example that is not allowed, predicate contains location-path
09:55:53 [Nick]
Erik: He can process this easily
09:57:10 [Nick]
John: gives counter examples
09:58:41 [Nick]
Erik: Want a definition of dynamic dependency
09:58:59 [Nick]
John: It is in the spec -> A dynamic dependency exists on any predicate unless all terms in the test are "fixed", where fixed means either a constant, or a value that will not change between operations explicitly defined as rebuilding computational dependencies.
09:59:33 [Nick]
John: We can say more
09:59:41 [Rafael]
Rafael has joined #forms
10:01:11 [Nick]
John: proposes new definition : An expression is dynamically dependent on a node or function return result if a
10:01:11 [Nick]
change to the node or function return result causes a change to the dependency
10:01:11 [Nick]
list of the expression.
10:01:37 [Nick]
Nick: How can we translate the definition to a form auther readable definition
10:01:45 [Nick]
Erik: Don't think we can
10:01:55 [Nick]
Erik: Why do we need rebuild?
10:02:10 [Nick]
Erik: The processor should be smart enough
10:03:27 [Nick]
Erik: We need to say what will happen if you violate this
10:03:40 [Nick]
John: The form might not work as expected
10:04:17 [Nick]
John: We figured out that delete and insert should do a rebuild
10:06:19 [Nick]
Erik: I think that the dependency algorithm is over specified
10:07:41 [Nick]
John: The master dependency ensures that calculation is done in a linear time.
10:08:02 [wellsk]
wellsk has joined #forms
10:08:05 [MarkS]
I have to go for a while
10:08:10 [MarkS]
be back later
10:08:10 [wellsk]
morning all
10:08:44 [Steven]
10:10:14 [Nick]
Nick: You can skip parts in the rebuild if you are smart enough, as long as the result is the same as specified in the spec
10:15:16 [Nick]
John: There is simple difference between visiting and referencin a node
10:17:11 [Nick]
John: <loan-record><principal></principal><duration></duration><interest></interest><mont-pay></mont-pay><total></total><interest-paid></interest-paid></loan-record>
10:19:04 [Nick]
John: if you have calculates on the elements, you vistit the multiple child nodes for name element tests, but only references one element
10:21:17 [Nick]
John: if you don't make a difference between visiting and referencing node you get false circular dependencies
10:27:28 [Nick]
John: We execute all the xpath expressions to know what nodes are referenced and are in the dependency graph
10:28:01 [Nick]
Erik: We were going to do static analysis, and that will not work correctly for John's example
10:38:20 [Nick]
Nick: Explains an algrorithm that solves the referenced node problem using a strandard xpath engine
10:41:49 [Nick]
Erik: John's definition is more clear, and the section should not start with a negative sentance
10:42:07 [ebruchez]
10:42:53 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: We accept that a better definition is needed and defintion for wath happens when you use a dynamic dep. in the model
10:43:47 [Steven]
10:44:02 [Steven]
10:44:34 [Nick]
ACTION: jboyer Correct section 7.3.1 Dynamic Dependencies with spec text based on the notes of issue 142
10:44:34 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-410 - Correct section 7.3.1 Dynamic Dependencies with spec text based on the notes of issue 142 [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
10:45:07 [Nick]
TOPIC: issue 41
10:51:12 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
11:02:07 [Nick]
Erik: Why do we say By default, all binding expressions refer to the first instance
11:02:07 [Nick]
within the context model. This behavior can be changed with the
11:02:07 [Nick]
instance() function.
11:02:22 [Nick]
John: The sentence is wrong
11:02:38 [Nick]
John: It is redundant, so get rid of it
11:03:45 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: Remove By default, all binding expressions refer to the first instancewithin the context model. This behavior can be changed with the instance() function."
11:04:48 [Nick]
Erik: Section "7.5.2 Model Binding Expressions" what is a Model Binding Expressions?
11:05:37 [Nick]
Erik: Binding expressions do not always throw binding exception but also compute exceptions?
11:05:54 [ebruchez]
11:07:12 [Nick]
John: Every expression in a bind is a Model Binding Expressions, and by consequence the dynamic depency limition apply to them
11:09:01 [Nick]
John: we introduce the trem compute expressions
11:10:52 [Nick]
s/ we introduce the trem compute expressions/ we have coputed expression/
11:11:41 [Roger]
11:13:08 [John_Boyer]
Proposed Resolution: For issue 41 point 3, a computed expression is not a kind of model binding expression AND clarify that dynamic dep. issues affect both model binding expressions and computed expressions
11:14:34 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: For issue 41 point 3, a computed expression is not a kind of model binding expression AND clarify that dynamic dep. issues affect both model binding expressions and computed expressions
11:15:07 [Nick]
ACTION: jboyer : implement issue 41 point 3, a computed expression is not a kind of model binding expression AND clarify that dynamic dep. issues affect both model binding expressions and computed expressions
11:15:07 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-411 - : implement issue 41 point 3, a computed expression is not a kind of model binding expression AND clarify that dynamic dep. issues affect both model binding expressions and computed expressions [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
11:16:19 [Nick]
ACTION: jboyer :Why does Section "7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions":
11:16:19 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-412 - :Why does Section \"7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions\": [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
11:16:19 [Nick]
contain implement issue 41 point 3, a computed expression is not a kind of model binding expression AND clarify that dynamic dep. issues affect both model binding expressions and computed expressions
11:17:16 [Steven]
11:17:27 [Steven]
rrsagent, help
11:17:34 [Nick]
ACTION: jboyer :Why does Section "7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions":
11:17:34 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-413 - :Why does Section \"7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions\": [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
11:17:54 [Steven]
11:18:02 [Steven]
11:18:51 [Steven]
rrsagent, grep @
11:18:51 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. Sorry, nothing found for '@'
11:18:53 [Nick]
Section "7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions":
11:18:53 [Nick]
Erik: Why contain Section "7.5.3 UI Binding Expressions": "Dynamic dependences are allowed in UI binding expressions based on
11:18:53 [Nick]
the conformance profile."
11:20:39 [Nick]
John: I will take care of 4.b when processing 1
11:21:13 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: We allow dynamic dependencies in the UI
11:22:30 [Nick]
Erik: Section "4.3.4 The xforms-refresh Event": says that bindings should be reevaluated as necessary, what does this mean?
11:22:55 [Nick]
John: It is not enough if you use the index() in the ui
11:25:42 [Nick]
John: the index() should trigger a pseudo dependency
11:28:11 [Nick]
Erik: The text dynamic dependencies in the UI are supported implies that it will update the UI when the index is changed
11:28:40 [Nick]
s/Erik: /john :/
11:30:54 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: change "3. All UI bindings should be reevaluated as necessary." to "3. All UI bindings should be reevaluated."
11:31:35 [Nick]
S/3. All UI bindings should be reevaluated./3. All UI bindings should appear as they were reevaluated./
11:32:05 [ebruchez]
s/as they/as if they
11:35:54 [Nick]
Erik : In 6. Section "4.6.7 Sequence: Value Change": "xforms-refresh performs reevaluation of UI binding expressions" but maybe it is OK now, that we addressed point 5
11:36:48 [John_Boyer]
adjourn for lunch
11:37:40 [Nick]
RESOLUTION: We will not change the text related to xforms-refresh in 4.6.7 Sequence Value Change
13:08:41 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
13:11:51 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
13:14:55 [John_Boyer]
back from lunch
13:18:17 [Steven]
Topic: SMIL3 State
13:22:57 [John_Boyer]
13:23:33 [Nick]
13:24:22 [Nick]
Charley: They added function, that can be used in the expression languages
13:24:46 [Nick]
John: Can they acces instance data
13:24:58 [Nick]
Charley: That is defined in the next section
13:25:16 [Nick]
Steven: Expression is a poorly name
13:25:28 [Nick]
Uli: It is more like relevant
13:25:28 [Steven]
13:25:42 [Nick]
John: It is more like if
13:25:51 [Nick]
Steven: They should use a better name
13:26:17 [Nick]
John: People don't like negative name
13:26:38 [Nick]
Uli: Maybe use active, show, ...
13:27:04 [Nick]
John: They don't say anything about evaluation context
13:27:22 [Nick]
Charley: They say something about it som sections before
13:28:23 [Nick]
Charley: there is informative text 'The context in which the expressions are evaluated is as follows:'
13:28:38 [Nick]
Uli: Note that "out of scope" here refers only to the scope of the State Test module, which only involves scalar expressions, the expression context is more fully defined in the Language Profile because it includes the State Test module as well.
13:29:06 [Nick]
Steven: They say not which language to use, so the language needs to define the context
13:29:29 [Nick]
Nick: They have a language attribute
13:29:38 [Nick]
Charley: It is on state
13:30:48 [Nick]
Charley: The SMIL 3.0 Language Profile specifies that XPath 1.0 is used as __the__ expression language.
13:31:10 [Nick]
John: They need links to supported Language Profiles
13:33:50 [Nick]
Charley: No distinction between model and instance
13:35:45 [Nick]
Nick: can in xforms setvalue set an attribute that doesn't exists?
13:35:55 [Nick]
Charley: Do they support attributes?
13:36:13 [Nick]
Nick: It maybe dependant on the language you use
13:36:26 [Nick]
John: newvalue is our insert?
13:36:30 [Nick]
Charley: Yes
13:36:47 [Nick]
John: where is the delete action?They don't have it
13:37:31 [Nick]
Charley: The name state is confusing if used in combination with State Chart XML
13:37:37 [Nick]
Steven: It is name spaced
13:37:55 [Nick]
John: New value is like insert
13:38:09 [klotz]
like about 10% of insert
13:39:15 [Nick]
Nick: Maybe they have languages that only support flat space (just like variables)
13:40:13 [Nick]
John: So position should be defined in language profile
13:42:14 [Nick]
John: if in xpath points to no element how do you know where to create the element
13:42:52 [Nick]
Charley: The section is not well structured
13:44:57 [Nick]
John: where are they going to insert the name element?First child?
13:46:17 [Nick]
John: Is name an XPath
13:46:30 [Nick]
Charley: Do they only support elements?
13:46:51 [Nick]
15.6.5 Data Model
13:47:08 [Nick]
Charley: Why does it appear here (15.6.5 Data Model)
13:47:36 [Nick]
Charley: They could use a lot of more examples
13:47:59 [Nick]
Nick: There is a lot informative
13:48:13 [Nick]
John: They state only contains instance
13:48:36 [Nick]
Charley: They have no seperate model an instance
13:49:32 [Nick]
Nick: Why is everything in 15.6.6 Data Model Events informative
13:49:46 [Nick]
Charley: Let's asume that it is normative
13:50:01 [Nick]
Charley: they only have two events
13:50:37 [Nick]
Charley: Do you get a statechange on a new value
13:51:20 [Nick]
John: If so is ref the ref+name of newvalue
13:52:11 [Nick]
Charley: Are it DOM events?
13:52:22 [John_Boyer]
and third, if they buy our point about needing a delete, then stateChange will probably have to tell what node lost a child but not which child (because it has been deleted)
13:52:52 [Steven]
13:53:58 [Nick]
Charlie: When do you get a contentControlChange event, do you always get both events?
13:55:15 [Nick]
Charlie: Should SMIL be included in a host language?
13:55:22 [Nick]
Steven: It has a root element
13:56:22 [Nick]
John: distinct xmlid __namespace__ should be distinct xmlid __space__
13:57:07 [Nick]
John: I want setvalue, insert, delete and a submission module on top
13:57:45 [Nick]
Charlie: The SMIL StateSubmission Module only says that they use XForms submissions
13:57:56 [Nick]
Charlie: What did they do with our events?
13:58:24 [Nick]
John: Could you capture an xforms-submit-done event and do a setvalue
13:58:41 [Nick]
Steven: Do they allow more then one submission element?
13:58:53 [Nick]
Charley: How do fire a submission
13:59:16 [Nick]
John: We are in front of them, couldn't they use XForms 1.1 submission
14:00:03 [Nick]
John: submisison is outside state (read instance) like our submission is out of our instance but inside the model
14:00:29 [Nick]
Charlie: Is this the way to go, just copy past stuf you want out of our spec?
14:01:03 [Nick]
John: They only support one state, so submission will always replace the state
14:01:19 [Nick]
John: The clasic search terms example is not supported
14:01:33 [Steven]
14:01:54 [Nick]
Charlie: They are doing a profile, but maybe they are 'borrowing' not enough
14:02:01 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minuts
14:02:01 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minuts', Steven. Try /msg RRSAgent help
14:02:08 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:02:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
14:02:41 [Steven]
14:02:42 [Nick]
John: Solution they could use only one state, if they add the target attribute of XForms 1.1
14:02:46 [Steven]
14:03:25 [Nick]
Charlie: We have been talking of AVT's for years, and they just add it without saying much about it
14:03:48 [Nick]
John: How do they activate the send
14:04:40 [Nick]
Nick: send is activated by they timing construct
14:04:51 [Nick]
John: Is submit synchronous
14:05:19 [Nick]
Charlie: You need async in a multimedia env.
14:05:54 [Nick]
Charlie: submission is new in SMIL 3.0
14:06:09 [John_Boyer]
in xforms 1.1, submission is asynch by default
14:06:14 [Nick]
Charlie: maybe they think it is a zero duration action, like writing to a file
14:06:44 [John_Boyer]
which means that the result won't be available when the send finishes.
14:06:55 [Charlie]
Charlie has joined #forms
14:07:05 [John_Boyer]
If they say synchronous, then it blocks, which may not be wha they want for multimedia presentation
14:07:36 [John_Boyer]
if asynch, then they will need to be able to process xforms-submit-done and xforms-submit-error events
14:08:17 [Nick]
Charlie: They point to xslt for AVT
14:08:17 [MarkS]
MarkS has joined #forms
14:09:41 [Nick]
Charlie: if you have async events what is the relation between events and the normal timed execution, of actions
14:10:04 [Steven]
i/TOPIC: Issue 28/Scribe: Nick/
14:10:09 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:10:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
14:10:20 [Nick]
John: the events are queued in XForms
14:10:38 [Nick]
John: The stepper does it execute the events?
14:12:13 [Nick]
John: Do we want to meet them om the TP?
14:13:26 [Steven]
14:16:50 [Nick]
14:18:50 [Nick]
ACTION: jboyer to ask Voice Browser Working Group to meet us at the TPA
14:18:50 [trackbot-ng]
Created ACTION-414 - Ask Voice Browser Working Group to meet us at the TPA [on John Boyer - due 2007-09-21].
14:30:48 [Nick]
John: I will make the agenda and Erik will chair the next meeting
14:31:59 [Nick]
TOPIC: Future meetings
14:32:25 [Nick]
Steven: Some people said it would be a light meeting at the TPA
14:33:17 [Nick]
Steven: We need more comitment from people, to come the f2f meetings
14:34:50 [Nick]
John: We pre-alocated trips
14:35:48 [Nick]
Steven: remote confernce turnout was low
14:36:17 [Nick]
John: w3c says that had to go to 3 out of 4 meetings
14:36:44 [Steven]
2 out of 3
14:38:01 [unl]
unl has joined #forms
14:38:33 [Nick]
John: We can do 3 meetings a year
14:40:42 [Nick]
John: If we go down to 3, we will slow down
14:41:16 [Steven]
Proposed 31 Jan/1 Feb (XHTML), 4-6 Feb Forms, North America (Possibly North Carolina)
14:41:16 [Steven]
14:41:16 [Steven]
Proposed 1-2 May 1/3 (XHTML), 5-7 May (Forms), Amsterdam
14:41:16 [Steven]
14:41:16 [Steven]
Proposed 10-11 July (XHTML), 14-16 July (Forms) Victoria, Canada
14:41:17 [Steven]
14:41:19 [Steven]
Technical Plenary 20-25 October, Paris, France
14:41:27 [Steven]
14:41:47 [Nick]
Steven: Do we want to continue to offer remote
14:42:06 [Nick]
John: It is hard to go out to f2f meetings
14:42:21 [Nick]
Charlie: You have the time zone differnce
14:42:37 [wellsk]
Reservations are confirmed for RTP, NC have been made for the Jan 3-Feb 6
14:42:43 [Nick]
Setven: You can do the time difference when you stay local
14:42:56 [Steven]
14:43:16 [wellsk]
My two sense, attending remote is difficult -- I'd rather be f2f
14:43:18 [Steven]
Jan 31 I hope wellsk
14:43:24 [wellsk]
14:43:29 [wellsk]
Jan 31-Feb 6
14:44:04 [wellsk]
14:44:27 [Steven]
ah! GOod!
14:44:33 [Steven]
I'd forgotten that
14:48:36 [Nick]
John: De we provide call in service in future meetings?
14:48:43 [Nick]
Steven: What do we want?
14:50:20 [Nick]
Charlie: Maybe we should try a f2f with everybody on the phone?
14:50:28 [klotz]
as long as steven brings a mike
14:50:36 [Nick]
Erik: It is hard
14:50:38 [Steven]
14:51:08 [MarkS]
what about telepathy?
14:51:16 [MarkS]
that would be nice and quiet
14:58:14 [Nick]
John: We should stay with 4 meetings a year, should allow dail in for invited experts,
14:58:31 [Nick]
John: We had a good f2f
14:58:41 [Nick]
TOPIC: Editors
14:59:04 [Nick]
John: We going to have future versions
14:59:35 [Nick]
John: An editor has to go to ALL f2f meetings
15:00:14 [Nick]
John: You have to spend more time, and prob. in your spare time
15:00:25 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:00:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
15:00:57 [Nick]
John: Erik is a possible one
15:01:06 [Nick]
Erik: The comitment is great
15:03:13 [Nick]
John: our charter only says XForms 2.0
15:05:50 [Nick]
John: We will need to update the charter schedule on the homepage at some time
15:10:22 [Charlie]
Charlie has joined #forms
15:21:38 [ebruchez]
15:27:05 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:27:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
15:30:37 [John_Boyer]
15:31:11 [wellsk]
wellsk has left #forms
15:31:27 [John_Boyer]
John_Boyer has left #forms
16:38:19 [Nick]
Nick has joined #Forms