Weekly Forms WG Teleconference

13 Aug 2008


See also: IRC log


Charlie, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, wellsk, prb, ebruchez, Steven
MarkB, Kenneth, Leigh, Rafael, Uli




<John_Boyer> scribe: Erik

<John_Boyer> scribenick: ebruchez

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Aug/0049.html

The Forms Newsletter

John: Do we have anything new to mention, it's been a couple of months.

Steven: I will try to see if I see something.

<nick> rest

Steven: There has been some talk about XRX (XForms/REST/XQuery). It is an interesting way of looking at the world. We could gather some of the information that has been produced on this.

John: Regarding Ubiquity, we want to wait a bit more before making a big splash.

<nick> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/XRX

Steven: I am quite impressed.

John: We have loading time performance to work on. We want accuracy first, speed second.

<Charlie> Paul: the ubiquity files will eventually be compressed which will help load time

Paul: We load lots of small files. That can be improved.

XForms 1.1

Steven: Re. Input Mode, [...] hoping that Martin will review what I did.

John: Do we need to book a call with Martin?

Steven: First let's see if he responds, then we'll see if we need a call.

John: Next things regards the submission headers fix.

Steven: BTW we need to make sure we refer to XML 4th edition.

<Steven> and namespaces 2e

John: Implementation report progress, Keith, it seems there is something new?

Keith: [...]
... It's hard for the public to access those builds.

<nick> We refer to 'Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition)'

John: Would be good to have an implementation report on publicly available software.

<scribe> ACTION: Keith to find out whether latest code changes to Firefox XForms extension can be made public. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/13-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-487 - Find out whether latest code changes to Firefox XForms extension can be made public. [on Keith Wells - due 2008-08-20].

John: What about Erik?

Erik: Still would like to do it, but we have been overwhelmed with other tasks.

John: I would like to get one for Ubiquity as well.
... We absolutely want XForms 1.1 out, so we need the implementation reports.

Action items

Charlie: Regarding the Joint Task Force, [...]
... I am trying to find where we are at with the simplified syntax.

<Charlie> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Mar/0097.html

<Charlie> John: that's current, plus put name attribute on bind to create variables

John: Steven, what about "Sentence about XHTML Modularization"?

Steven: Will make this a higher priority.

John: There was some work by Leigh regarding the XPath function library.

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Aug/0038.html

Keith: I just sent an email to the list about the test suite.

John: (going through Keith's email)
... 5) section 10.3, I made it clearer how the @origin attribute is evaluated (relative to the in-scope evaluation context)
... 6) Changes to the Accept header are in now

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/specs/XForms1.1/index-diff.html#SOAP-HTTP-Binding

John: Paul, in particular, it would be great if you could review that part.

Draft instance data module

<John_Boyer> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Aug/0021.html

John: Charlie, can you drive us through that spec text?

Charlie: Will need CVS access.

John: Steven and I will make that happen.

Charlie: We want a very minimal module capturing "data island aspects". You only have the instance element, @src/@resource.
... Question about common attributes. But there is nothing else in this module.
... Raising the question again about whether this it is a useful level of functionality.

John: I think so.

Charlie: It seems to me that @src should be a common function. We have been back and forth on this.

John: We need the instance element as a base layer.
... Didn't your recent demo only use this level of data support you have here?
... I.e. you didn't need insert or delete.
... Are we still talking about a separate DOM?

Charlie: See 1.1.2.
... [...]

John: I think one positive aspect of this level of modularization is that it is pointing out at little mistakes, like dispatching xforms-link-exception to the model.

Charlie: Some questions, like what if other modules need to define xforms-link-exception too.

John: It wouldn't be a big issue if we had to introduce an incompatiblity with xforms-link-exception as that will stop XForms processing anyway.
... If you target it at xforms:instance, it will bubble up to the model anyway, if you use a model.

Charlie: Do we need schema functions at this level too?

John: Schema should be in a separate module.

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features

Erik: What about new attributes I proposed to control validation lax/strict and types on xforms:instance? Would we still put this in a separate module?

Charlie: Yes.

John: The schema module will add to the Model module, so it can add to the data module as well.
... For now, we keep this as an XML data model. Other needs can be addressed later if demand arises.
... I had this question about modularization and the & character.


Nick: You need to specify things like xml:base explicitly.

<John_Boyer> common contains foreign namespaced attributes, not just id

<John_Boyer> trying to work out if we need a module for common attributes

Nick: Can't the driver decide whether it allows attributes in a foreign namespace?

John: So as per modularization, we have no choice but to use this "any".

Charlie: Then I will add @id explicitly.

Nick: Then you can't extend the attribute group.

Charlie: But modularization requires this extensibility.

Nick: So I thought we would add commons to all elements.

<nick> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_common_collection

<nick> Common : Core + Events + I18N + Style

Steven: [...] XHTML has a common and a core set.

John: Can we reuse anything from XHTML

<nick> Core xml:space ("default"* | "preserve"), class (NMTOKENS), id (ID), title (CDATA)

<nick> I18N dir ("ltr" | "rtl"), xml:lang (CDATA)

<nick> Events onclick (Script), ondblclick (Script), onmousedown (Script), onmouseup (Script), onmouseover (Script), onmousemove (Script), onmouseout (Script), onkeypress (Script), onkeydown (Script), onkeyup (Script)

<nick> Style style (CDATA)

<nick> Common Core + Events + I18N + Styl

Steven: If a module uses common, then that provides an extension point as well.

John: So I can create a module that extends from common?

Steven: The instance element can have an attribute set which extends on common.
... You need an extensibility point.

John: We still have a problem understanding how to specify these aspects of modularization with schema.

Steven: The spec is in PR now.

<Steven> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/schema_module_defs.html#a_smodule_Intrinsic_Events

John: I am not finding an example.

Steven: (Sent link to example.)

<Steven> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_xhtmlmodules

Charlie: I am looking for the spec text so I know where to put that ampersand.

Steven: (Sent link to example.)

<nick> http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410/xhtml-modularization.html#s_imapmodule

John: How do I say in the instance module that I have a attribute group that may be extended by other modules?

Steven: In principle, they are all extensible.

John: But I don't see this for attributes.

<John_Boyer> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstraction.html#s_abstraction

Steven: Right, [...]. But I thought we were talking about the schema.

John: We define an instance element. Later, we want to extend. We just write instance&, and we are done?

Steven: Right.

Nick: It's better to have a common attribute group to facilitate the extension.

John: We don't need to have the common attribute on xf:input in order to have the binding attributes, right?

Steven: Correct.

John: Issue is that XHTML common is huge compared to that of XForms.

Steven: True unless you introduce the host language.
... common is where the host language gets to add stuff.

Nick: I think we need to add common to all elements.

Steven: It has to be the XForms common.

John: How can we then add attributes in no namespace?

Steven: Doesn't everybody allow @class anyway?

John: Maybe because they don't perform runtime validation.

Steven: Attributes without a prefix are in no namespace.

Charlie: So we add common to our list of modules.

Erik: We already allow id on every element in the spec.

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Keith to find out whether latest code changes to Firefox XForms extension can be made public. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/13-forms-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/08/13 16:22:51 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133  of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/library,/library./
Succeeded: s/separate instance/separate module/
Succeeded: s/right>/right?/
Found Scribe: Erik
Found ScribeNick: ebruchez
Default Present: Charlie, Nick_van_den_Bleeken, John_Boyer, wellsk, prb, ebruchez, Steven
Present: Charlie Nick_van_den_Bleeken John_Boyer wellsk prb ebruchez Steven
Regrets: MarkB Kenneth Leigh Rafael Uli
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Aug/0049.html
Got date from IRC log name: 13 Aug 2008
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/08/13-forms-minutes.html
People with action items: keith

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]