12:53:07 RRSAgent has joined #forms 12:53:08 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-forms-irc 12:53:17 rrsagent, make minutes 12:53:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-forms-minutes.html John_Boyer 12:53:24 rrsagent, make log public 12:54:47 Meeting: W3C Forms Working Group Virtual Face-to-Face Day 12:55:03 s/Day/Day 2/ 12:57:34 HTML_Forms()9:00AM has now started 12:57:41 +[IBM] 12:57:49 zakim, [IBM] is Charlie 12:57:49 +Charlie; got it 12:58:56 wellsk has joined #forms 12:59:26 +wellsk 12:59:29 -Charlie 12:59:30 +Charlie 12:59:35 zakim, code? 12:59:35 the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), nick 13:00:05 zakim, dial steven-617 13:00:05 ok, Steven; the call is being made 13:00:08 +Steven 13:00:10 +??P3 13:00:21 zakim, I am ??P3 13:00:21 +nick; got it 13:00:34 zakim, who is here? 13:00:34 On the phone I see Charlie, wellsk, Steven, nick 13:00:35 On IRC I see wellsk, RRSAgent, Zakim, John_Boyer, Charlie, nick, Steven, trackbot 13:01:32 +John_Boyer 13:04:36 unl has joined #forms 13:06:18 klotz has joined #forms 13:06:42 Scribe: Charlie 13:07:41 Topic: Data accessors module 13:07:49 aka data manipulation module 13:08:07 +unl 13:08:21 John: is this the right place for serialization as currently stated in the wiki? 13:08:36 e.g. for some subtree, do the serialization 13:08:40 +klotz 13:08:50 is this submission or a property/service of an instance itself? 13:08:57 things other than submission might want to use this 13:09:25 this will interact with the model when MIPs are involved and validation 13:10:10 from an impl point of view we can see how model serialization can overload the default... 13:10:25 what do you all think? 13:10:42 Steven: hmmmm 13:10:49 initial feeling it's not the place 13:10:56 seems more to do with submission than access 13:11:03 Uli: me too 13:11:14 should also consider other data types than XML 13:11:21 doesn't look like it belongs to instance 13:11:30 Charlie: -1 13:11:56 John: how do I comment things out in the wiki? 13:13:29 Topic: Model module 13:15:31 zakim, mute me 13:15:31 nick should now be muted 13:16:21 is there a top level name other than model that includes all these related functions? 13:17:56 grouping these under the Model Layer set of specs 13:18:21 flattening a bit the space of specs 13:20:25 looking at model element as container, but not necessarily requiring all of the following components 13:20:53 we'll have a schema to show the required/optional content of model 13:21:44 any suggestions for what goes in model? 13:21:50 Leigh: recall it had optional instance 13:21:58 then some empty content groups 13:22:07 for other modules to insert into 13:22:40 zakim, mute me 13:22:40 unl should now be muted 13:23:07 should the instance module not just say 0 or more 13:23:29 because an implicit instance is also controled by the instance module 13:23:38 zakim, unmute me 13:23:38 nick should no longer be muted 13:24:10 Nick: does model module need to say 0 or more, or just ref the instance module? 13:24:38 Nick: lazy authoring can imply an instance even if it doesn't occur syntactically 13:25:07 Leigh: can imagine some languages might want to say exactly one instance (perhaps SMIL state?) 13:25:40 Nick: would have thought model provides insertion point, and instance controls how 13:26:47 Leigh: this seems to be a case where the model needs to know about the instance spec 13:26:56 Leigh: vs. a separate driver module 13:28:07 Charlie: seems like model gets to decide on the policy for how many instances to include 13:28:57 Model defines a functions attribute, declaring extension functions being used 13:29:08 as in current practice 13:29:44 sort of a "must-understand" attribute 13:30:11 doesn't the driver module needs to that 13:30:33 Charlie: should this actually go on model? 13:30:37 because I could see another language having other functions by default 13:33:30 have to worry about the case where people avoid using this attribute by stipulating their function is in the namespace URI defined for extension functions 13:33:36 is this attribute really useful? 13:34:26 Leigh: doesn't really address whether the form is coherent and will work 13:34:34 Leigh: dog analogy 13:35:28 I we allow modules to add functions, then each module can add its functions, and maybe model can add an XPath function that you can use to check if a function is available one that allows you to check if a module is available 13:36:31 Leigh: we have a larger problem around module coherence 13:37:21 Property function 13:37:31 supports version, conformance level 13:37:44 could be the function Nick was describing 13:38:04 I think it should go there 13:38:06 model historically has been the focus of this type of descriptor 13:38:23 which modules are available 13:39:15 space separate list beginning with "full" or "basic" to allow for extension descriptions 13:39:21 s/separate/separated 13:39:34 not well defined yet what this string includes 13:39:38 zakim, mute me 13:39:38 nick should now be muted 13:40:11 impls can use own qualified names but not unqualified ones 13:40:23 e.g. locale or user agent 13:40:35 could be extended to allow listing of available modeuls 13:40:41 s/modeuls/modules 13:40:46 leave here? 13:40:50 +1 13:41:10 Model attribute added to SNB NSB groups 13:41:45 injects attribute and amends calculation behavior for evaluation context, pre-processing step to consider model 13:42:18 RRRR actions as well as events? 13:42:48 maybe rebuild and recalculate should be added by calculate module 13:42:56 only need dependency graph when you're calculating 13:43:05 relevant/readonly MIPs are atomic 13:43:15 is this true? 13:43:21 they could have calculates 13:44:36 Shouldn't: revalidate be added by the validation Module 13:47:04 refresh should go to the UI 13:47:56 Leigh: model is a mini-container spec sets context for evaluation and for insertion of other modules 13:48:51 and reset can go to the data accessors module 13:50:50 zakim, unmute me 13:50:50 nick should no longer be muted 13:51:27 Nick: can reset be used on model to define the scope over which instances should be reset? 13:51:42 Leigh: instances might also maintain their own shadow data 13:51:54 Charlie: yes, that's how it's currently described in the data island module 13:52:09 John: yes, reset knows the instances in a given scope 13:52:37 could also be done with instance function 13:52:48 Nick: then reset wouldn't be needed 13:53:10 John: right, maybe instance function is in the wrong place 13:53:44 if you only have a data layer, then reset on data island / accessor ... 13:54:05 Leigh: if you only have an instance, does this require you to maintain the original/old data to do reset? 13:54:13 might be easier not to require them to do so 13:54:25 inline is easy, but loaded by submission is expensive 13:55:03 (various debates about "expensive") 13:55:41 Leigh: may be too much function for simple users of data island 13:56:07 Leigh: raises question of whether we want resettable data islands 13:56:17 John: even original HTML forms can do this 13:56:23 Leigh: that's why we put this in 13:56:37 (physics analogy) 13:56:48 Leigh analogy_count++ 13:58:39 Leigh: could get out of control...where do we draw the line? 13:58:53 Leigh: why not intermediate checkpoints, rollback, undo? 14:00:18 John: leaving both reset action and saved state on the model seems to make sense 14:00:26 Leigh: can see multiple options 14:00:38 zakim, mute me 14:00:38 nick should now be muted 14:00:39 John: i'm seeing that reset is too much for instance layer 14:00:54 Leigh: how will model get the data ? 14:00:59 John: will have to ask the instance 14:01:54 -wellsk 14:02:33 Leigh: this seems consistent 14:04:33 +wellsk 14:06:22 John: let's rephrase the logic around data-instance-load to clarify that users can dispatch this event to trigger the loading behavior 14:06:29 not just a cancelable notification event 14:08:01 Roger has joined #forms 14:08:18 consensus is to have model support the reset behavior by interlock with the load/getinstancedocument behavior in instance 14:08:50 John: lets consider refresh action and event 14:09:01 are those defined by model module or by UI module? 14:09:08 seems like the UI module 14:09:28 until you have binding attributes as UI binding you don't have targets for value-changed etc 14:09:59 john_analogy_count++ 14:10:11 going up a hill to the UI module at the top 14:12:05 John: who defines the model events? construct-done, etc etc 14:12:11 Leigh: the model 14:12:16 John: yup 14:13:22 John: what about xforms-ready? 14:13:30 Leigh: driver module, xforms driver 14:13:57 happens after UI is initialized 14:14:03 John: if you have a UI module 14:14:27 default behavior model-construct-done then ready with nothing in between if you have no UI 14:16:23 Leigh: the top level spec, driver module, seems to have to control this 14:19:17 John: introduces xforms driver module in the wiki 14:24:38 John: behavior can only be added via prose in the spec 14:24:50 John: nothing in the processing model is visible in the surface syntax 14:25:23 Leigh: so there may need to be more IDL on the model to support the driver 14:27:51 John: model's participation in refresh might be to provide a change list 14:28:21 Leigh: seems like we need to add this capability to the model 14:28:55 Leigh: responsibility for doing the refreshing of controls is in the UI module 14:29:50 John: so model module needs to provide change list but it's up to actions and modules like calculate to contribute to that change list 14:30:03 Leigh: who runs the RRRR sequence? 14:30:40 John: model adds the notion of deferred update to action processing 14:34:30 John: more likely deferred update concept added by driver not model 14:35:57 +1 14:43:05 here 14:43:07 here 14:43:39 Scribe: wellsk 14:44:14 TPAC: XML security Group: 11-12:30 14:46:10 Meet with Roland perhaps after lunch on Monday 2:00 14:49:56 zakim, who is noisy? 14:50:06 klotz, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Charlie (5%), John_Boyer (76%), Steven (5%), wellsk (59%) 14:50:21 Monday morning: continue Module construction 14:50:37 Submisison or UI 14:50:55 s/sis/ssi/ 14:51:46 Topic: Change list in model module 14:52:28 changes: 1) calculate 2) set value 3) external DOM access 14:52:51 in past DOM Access that impl can provide copy and manipulate it 14:53:12 then manipulations go into real DOM 14:53:23 impls listen to DOM mutations 14:53:41 which contribute to change list 14:53:57 perhaps setvalue changes can do this 14:54:30 Charlie: low level use of IDL for modifications 14:54:52 Charlie: giving means to do this 14:55:56 John: modules listen for DOM mutations 14:56:10 to reflect DOM changes 14:56:23 into data layer 14:57:09 Charlie may not be 1-1 corresponance with chnage list and DOM mutations 14:57:23 s/Charlie/Charlie:/ 14:58:27 s/corresponance/correspondance/ 14:59:20 John: UI binding expressions concerned with low level changes 15:00:32 added: "by listening for data mutations, which may come from setvalue, calculate, or external DOM access)" 15:00:56 Doesn't matter which module, it's a service of the model 15:01:16 other consumer is calculate module 15:01:36 takes change list for starting point to evaulate dependency processing 15:01:57 s/evaulate/evaluate/ 15:02:48 UI and calculate are consumers of the change list 15:02:55 drives changes to UI 15:03:27 rrsagent, make minutes 15:03:27 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-forms-minutes.html Steven 15:03:29 Charlie: this is nhot the dependency list, this is the change list 15:03:38 s/nhot/not/ 15:03:40 s/nhot/not/ 15:04:44 Chair: John 15:05:28 dependency graphs doesn't get into endless changes 15:05:38 do we want to move to bind module? 15:06:05 scribeoptions: -implicitContinuations 15:06:06 Topic: Bind module 15:06:10 rrsagent, make minutes 15:06:10 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-forms-minutes.html Steven 15:06:20 the bullet points are ok 15:06:53 Defining bind element 15:06:53 rebuild isn't in there now 15:07:00 has nodest attribute 15:07:05 and I have two exception events extra 15:07:29 Change from nodeset attr to Node Set Binding attributes 15:07:37 and Add @bind to SNB and NSB bindings 15:07:54 Model Item Properties Attribute Collection 15:08:20 adding model attribute to bind element 15:08:46 adding context attr to bind element 15:09:47 right 15:11:19 zakim, unmute me 15:11:19 nick should no longer be muted 15:11:31 15:11:59 Note that this adds model attr to bind ? and Note that this adds bind attr to bind ? 15:11:59 15:12:52 15:12:54 don't need extra ".." for the calculate attr 15:13:17 also changes node to shich MIP applies 15:13:31 which would make context useless on a bind 15:13:42 s/changes/doesn't change 15:13:58 s/which/otherwise 15:14:43 15:15:29 nodeset="c" resets nodes for which the MIPS apply 15:15:57 context isn't applied first -- the model attr is 15:16:17 The expression of the nodeset in the bind is what changes the node(s) to which the MIP applies 15:16:56 initial in-scope evaluation context 15:17:11 evaluate context attr in first place 15:18:24 then model attr is processed 15:18:29 then instance attr processed 15:18:38 then context attr processed 15:19:02 each making modification to inscope evaluation 15:20:45 context may not mean much with nodeset bindings 15:21:25 creating dependencies within binds 15:21:51 those binds with nodeset are evaluated before those that don't 15:22:48 Nick: downside not all nodeset evaluations are the same 15:23:28 creates cross-model binds 15:24:02 bind operates only within its model, or discontinue the bind 15:25:22 if bind elements is model A and can contribute to model B -- perhaps it doesn't make sense for model attrs? 15:25:52 Can bind determine if nodes belong to a model? 15:26:52 if bind has model attr and nodes with a model other than my owner -- then ignore the bind 15:27:35 Does bind modules live inside the model module 15:27:49 s/modules/module/ 15:28:12 Can use bind element with out expressed model? 15:28:34 if so, need an implied model 15:28:48 because binds scoped to a particular model 15:29:03 Is it a dependency we don't want? 15:29:30 Leigh: scoping to host document, model is a mini-host 15:30:17 John: needed to talk bind module and then model module with contributions to bind module. 15:30:34 Leigh: model provides the scope 15:30:44 Leigh: container for binds 15:31:15 Leigh: if no model, then implied model global to document 15:31:40 Leigh: scoped to containing thing 15:31:45 John: Form tag 15:32:42 Leigh: Form is a diff container other than model 15:33:18 Leigh: WebForms A uses Form module, not model module 15:34:06 Leigh: lower level specs using virtual versions of higher level specs like Model 15:34:14 The id resolution of the binds 15:34:20 Leigh: doesn't want this... 15:34:25 and the nodeset bindings 15:35:04 John: instance data with nodes associated with binds 15:35:27 John: binding attributes group contain a model attribute 15:36:04 Nick: bind with id attr scoped to model 15:36:42 issues of bind attr can be taken separately 15:37:16 Bind attr is treated seprately from model attr 15:37:37 s/seprately/separately/ 15:38:01 topological sort problem on bind element -- not supported right now 15:38:15 Leigh: what the scope was... 15:38:59 Leigh: model attr, inst attr 15:39:23 can't use data from a different model from data nodes... 15:40:01 bind element should make a determination of model scope 15:41:23 binding attr module evaluates in scope, model module adds to binding module to add scoping resolution 15:41:45 Leigh: if outside model, implied model -- scope would be document? 15:42:05 Leigh: same problem scoping with model attr 15:42:42 John: bind module has to know model module to know model attr was added to make the change 15:43:27 John: Model module provides scoping to bind module, but model can't do that. 15:43:42 until model attr is resolved.. 15:44:24 Model module scope restrictions on bind module and instance module, bind element not select model other than what contains it. 15:44:57 Leigh: do we want bind outside a model? 15:45:22 John: on bind element need nodeset attr, some use of context attr, 15:45:30 clear use for instance attr 15:45:52 headaches with model attr and binding attrs added to bind group 15:46:17 Nick: model module to define model attrs 15:46:31 ... if same model, you're done 15:47:13 John: if message action, contains UI binding, would resolve only within model 15:48:03 John: Model level, model specific binding attrs? 15:49:49 Leigh: @model and @bind not good on Bind element 15:50:20 John: model module needs to do scoping 15:50:48 John: on binding attrs on descendant elements. 15:51:45 John: Model module provides scope limiting behavior to binding attributes and instance functions indications 15:52:50 s/indications/invocations/ 15:53:56 The context attribute changes context for other attributes but does not, in and of itself, change the node to which MIPS are applied (e.g. if no nodeset is expressed) 15:54:42 Bind module provides a bind element with associated set of nodes to apply MIPs 15:55:10 determined by nodeset itself or in-scope evaluation otherwise 15:55:30 binding attributes module, give me results of binding attributes 15:55:50 ... No new results because ref or nodeset not expressed 16:00:04 This module needs to be able to answer the following questions: 16:00:06 * What is the initial inscope eval context of this element? 16:00:07 * What is the amended inscope eval context of this element? 16:00:09 * What is the result of the SNB or NSB? 16:00:10 * Was there an expresssed SNB or NSB (as opposed to the result being equal to the amended context)? 16:00:20 Break for hour 16:00:40 -klotz 16:00:42 -Charlie 16:00:44 -John_Boyer 16:00:46 -wellsk 16:00:47 -nick 16:00:49 -unl 16:57:10 -Steven 16:57:11 HTML_Forms()9:00AM has ended 16:57:13 Attendees were Charlie, wellsk, Steven, nick, John_Boyer, unl, klotz 16:57:28 zakim, this will be forms 16:57:28 ok, John_Boyer; I see HTML_Forms()9:00AM scheduled to start 237 minutes ago 16:57:39 zakim, you are really funny sometimes 16:57:39 I don't understand 'you are really funny sometimes', John_Boyer 16:57:53 zakim, see what I mean? 16:57:53 I don't understand your question, John_Boyer. 16:58:50 zakim, don't take this the wrong way, but you're being obtuse 16:58:50 I don't understand you, John_Boyer 16:59:09 zakim, I am a complex person... imagine that 16:59:09 I don't understand 'I am a complex person... imagine that', John_Boyer 16:59:32 zakim, you need to develop a comprehension of math-related puns 16:59:32 I don't understand you, John_Boyer 16:59:53 zakim, do you understand you substitution? 16:59:53 I don't understand your question, John_Boyer. 17:00:44 HTML_Forms()9:00AM has now started 17:00:45 +wellsk 17:01:36 +klotz 17:01:38 -klotz 17:01:38 +klotz 17:02:14 zakim, dial steven-617 17:02:14 ok, Steven; the call is being made 17:02:15 +Steven 17:02:46 zakim, code? 17:02:46 the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), nick 17:02:52 zakim is not answering... 17:03:03 -1 17:03:15 well, context conferencing system guy is answering, but he keeps hanging up before asking for the code. 17:03:31 he won't stop talking for me 17:03:38 Keith and I are on. 17:03:38 +[IBM] 17:03:44 zakim, [IBM] is Charlie 17:03:44 +Charlie; got it 17:04:08 zakim, code? 17:04:08 the conference code is 36767 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), nick 17:04:10 I'm trying a third time, will be another couple of seconds 17:04:12 +unl 17:04:15 prob doesn't like you nw John -- after teasing him 17:04:20 john, zakim is mad at you 17:04:28 I thought that might be the problem 17:04:34 +John_Boyer 17:05:50 zakim won't accept the passcode 17:05:53 Hi John 17:06:17 Hi Zakim, it seems you do understand "you substitution" 17:06:36 +??P7 17:07:01 zakim, I am ??P7 17:07:01 +nick; got it 17:14:13 I am 17:14:25 I'm also going 17:14:37 Mark said he was planning to come Tuesday 17:16:52 http://xformstest.org/2008-10-16.txt 17:18:05 scribenick: klotz 17:23:47 RDFa already has @datatype 17:24:05 Mark said that was OK. 17:28:21 zakim, mute me 17:28:21 unl should now be muted 17:28:44 So 17:30:05 s/content/ content/ 17:34:19 but what if they are conflicting 17:38:00 2009-02-03 17:38:22 datatype="xsd:dateTime"> 17:38:22 September 16th at 4pm 17:38:22 . 17:38:26 like this: 2008-10-16 17:38:54 today 17:39:52 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/ 17:50:03 http://xformstest.org/2008-10-16.txt 17:53:06 zakim, unmute me 17:53:06 unl should no longer be muted 17:54:13 http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/nrl.html 18:06:14 http://xformstest.org/2008-10-16.txt 18:11:22 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features 18:11:32 http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/specs/XForms1.1/index-diff.html#evt-revalidate 18:12:44 zakim, mute me 18:12:44 unl should now be muted 18:13:37 ok 18:13:46 Scribe: Charlie 18:13:56 charlie++ 18:14:07 Topic: relevant module 18:15:29 Nick: question on who will trigger the execution of this module? 18:15:45 for readonly as well 18:16:06 John: seem to have moved these decisions up to the driver level 18:16:12 a model doesn't know when to RRRR 18:16:21 and model module itself doesn't understand those concepts 18:16:27 since they've been injected from other modules 18:16:31 hence need for driver 18:16:41 that owns the "lifecycle" overall 18:18:21 Nick: MIP related events are targeted at UI controls...this module doesn't know about them 18:18:48 John: UI binding module seems to manage refresh so should do this too 18:19:17 Nick: how can that module know when MIPs change? 18:19:57 Leigh: Erik has mentioned that value-change should happen in the control 18:20:05 John: yes, we're moving in that direction 18:20:13 but for now we have the change list mechanism 18:21:25 each MIP module has to produce this info to be passed into the UI module for refresh and event dispatch 18:22:30 e.g. need operation to get list of changes, and also to clear list 18:22:32 on each MIP module 18:23:02 Leigh: probably not good to get too bogged down in details right now...e.g. potential synchronization problems between get and clear list 18:24:31 Leigh: doing a separate spec on metadata attached to the DOM would be a useful outcome here 18:24:36 John: yes, to support custom MIPs 18:25:40 need more extensive mechanism to handle types on custom MIPs -- beyond booleans which we currently have 18:27:03 Leigh: there's nobody who has packaged their DOM extensions for metadata into a standard spec 18:27:09 zakim, unmute me 18:27:09 unl should no longer be muted 18:27:12 John: maybe for WebApps WG 18:27:22 Leigh: this would be our MIPs spec 18:27:49 John: i see...we should write the MIP module and then use it for our current ones 18:27:58 Leigh: yes 18:28:07 John: do we have to write that now? 18:28:14 Leigh: it will fall out of the ones we have to do anyway 18:28:28 Uli: we already have use case for custom MIP 18:28:44 filename and mediatype for uploaded data 18:28:55 needed during serialization 18:29:11 no easy way to look back at the instance data from upload control 18:29:19 so we put this in a form of custom MIPs 18:30:35 Leigh: Chiba uses same DOM node factory to store internal info 18:31:14 leigh_analogy_count++ 18:31:20 cooking frogs 18:32:30 John: is that the bind module? 18:32:31 itself? 18:32:38 do we need a separate spec? 18:32:47 Leigh: +1 18:32:51 Charlie: +1 18:33:20 "Model item properties are infoset contributions made to instance data nodes can be distinguished along various axes." 18:33:22 Uli: what about the "user data" spec for dom? 18:33:46 in DOM level 3 18:33:48 from the spec, that is in the current bind spec 18:34:04 John: that could be an impl technique for our declarative level spec 18:36:54 zakim, mute me 18:36:54 unl should now be muted 18:37:16 John: adding an item to the bind module bullet list for element version as alternative syntax 18:37:39 Leigh: or 18:39:14 Leigh: what should it be called? 18:39:25 property, name, value 18:39:31 value could be calculated 18:39:44 or with element content if constant 18:44:47 John: setvalue, inset, delete, instance replacement all have to respect readonly MIP 18:44:57 not just consumed by UI layer 18:45:29 Leigh: we have xforms data model plus decorations 18:45:42 John: we have readonly decoration, but setvalue has to respect that MIP 18:46:01 readonly module (etc) has to specify restrictions on MIP processing 18:46:35 Leigh: what happens if you try? 18:46:39 John: just doesn't happen 18:47:15 John: also involves submission 18:47:25 partial instance replacement needs to be enforced/checked 18:47:34 parent/ancestor checked for readonly 18:48:50 readonly is only MIP handled this way 18:49:36 on earlier topic of custom MIPs, see DOM Level 3 UserData: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-DOM-Level-3-Core-20040407/core.html#Node3-setUserData and http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-DOM-Level-3-Core-20040407/core.html#Node3-getUserData 18:52:31 Leigh: DOM impl has metadata properties and when implementing readonly use those properties 18:53:17 so our DOM impl will be extended to respect readonly and access methods would be extended to enforce this 18:55:23 the readonly module says when you give out a DOM reference it comes with these extended APIs 19:01:25 John: wording about readonly could be inserted in the data island spec and then inherited around to consumers of that spec 19:01:39 let's pick up with submission and UI on monday 19:02:03 -klotz 19:02:06 -John_Boyer 19:02:07 -wellsk 19:02:07 -Charlie 19:02:09 -unl 19:02:09 -Steven 19:02:10 -nick 19:02:12 HTML_Forms()9:00AM has ended 19:02:13 Attendees were wellsk, klotz, Steven, Charlie, unl, John_Boyer, nick 19:02:38 zakim, who is here? 19:02:38 apparently HTML_Forms()9:00AM has ended, John_Boyer 19:02:39 On IRC I see klotz, unl, RRSAgent, Zakim, John_Boyer, Charlie, nick, Steven, trackbot 19:02:54 rrsagent, make minutes 19:02:54 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/16-forms-minutes.html John_Boyer 19:02:59 rrsagent, bye 19:02:59 I see no action items