W3C

- DRAFT -

Forms Working Group Teleconference

08 May 2013

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
pfennell, [IPcaller], Steven, ebruchez, nvdbleek
Regrets
Chair
Steven
Scribe
Nick

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 08 May 2013

<scribe> scribe:Nick

<Steven> scribenick: nvdbleek

Call next week

<Steven> http://www2013.org/

Steven: Can't attend next call

nvdbleek: depends on todays call

Comments on XForms 2.0 Working Draft 7 August 2012

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2013Apr/0000.html

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2013May/0001.html

Steven: He wants better support for SOAP
... He wants to remove requirements for GET and POST
... Do we need to do anything more then removing it?

nvdbleek: Why was the limitation there in the first place

Steven: I can't recall
... I'm happy not to put in any requirements on the method from the XForms side
... My proposal is to remove the requirements

ebruchez: Maybe John can comment on this

Steven: I'll e-mail him and ask
... The second bit I feel much comfortable about

ebruchez: You can't construct multipart-post yourself in XForms now
... he wants more control
... multipart-post contains multiple parts, if we have an upload bound to a node, we create an extra part containing the content of the URI
... You can't add extra parts using submissions
... Sometimes you want to do this

Steven: So this needs more thought
... An extra action feels the wrong approach
... I think it would be better to do it based on instances

ebruchez: You should be able to specify where to get content from, serialisation, content type, ...

Steven: It is related to the serialize() function

ebruchez: Kind of, this is a bit more complicated, because each part need to have its own

Steven: yes, but we were talking about how to specify the parameters

ebruchez: It should also support dynamic. E.g.: when attaching images, sometimes you have one, but it could be more
... We should support alternative parts (e.g.: text and HTML for e-mail)

Steven: I will reply to the e-mail that we will think about it further

<scribe> ACTION: Erik to propose a solution to support submitting multipart-post messages [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1944 - Propose a solution to support submitting multipart-post messages [on Erik Bruchez - due 2013-05-15].

ACTION-1939: Add the xforms:HTMLFragment data type and add text to

<Steven> the text area control similar like it is done for xs:date on xf:input

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013May/0005.html

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013Apr/0007.html

Steven: This is just a wrap-up

ebruchez: Its fine

Steven: Any other comments

The function Element

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013May/0004.html

ebruchez: I just made a few editorial changes

nvdbleek: They were fine for me

ebruchez: The other point was the ability to support multiple result elements
... In xslt when you construct a sequence you can interleave them, nest them,...
... For XForms it specifies the result, not a general sequence construct
... It is bit confusing if you have multiple result elements
... You can use the sequence constructor of XPath to return sequences

<ebruchez> (: comment :)

nvdbleek: no strong opinion about it

Steven: I'm happy with only one result element

<scribe> ACTION: function should only allow one result element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Error finding 'function'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/xforms/users>.

<scribe> ACTION: Erik function should only allow one result element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1945 - Function should only allow one result element [on Erik Bruchez - due 2013-05-15].

ACTION-1943: Erik investigate why XPath 3 chose the function signature they did for serialization

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013May/0003.html

<scribe> ACTION: Nick Adjust schema file to allow one result element for Function element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1946 - Adjust schema file to allow one result element for Function element [on Nick Van Den Bleeken - due 2013-05-15].

ebruchez: To summarise: we are looking for a way to specify the serialisation parameters for the serialise function

… they use an element to specify it, what is quite heavy, it is now in the serialisation spec, it is needed for the character map, it is a way to substitute characters when serialising (with other words do a transform)

… this is my interpretation, to confirm I send an e-mail to the public-qt-comments group

… they are at candidate recommendation

<Steven> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-qt-comments/2013May/

ebruchez: The second part is about what we or they can do to make it more light weight
... The easiest thing we can do is to use the xpath 3.0 format

… The second approach is to do it our own way

… (using tokens, JSON,...)

Steven: Do we have the use case of character maps

ebruchez: It is part from XML serialisation
... We could not care about it

Steven: Frankly that gives my vote at this time

ebruchez: We still need to have a way to specify the serialisation parameters

nvdbleek: In the past we tried to be as close as possible to a future XPath function

ebruchez: The cases you want to use the character maps is probably rare, the other parameters are more common
... We could support two formats, the one from XPath 3.0 and our own

nvdbleek: but then you loose the advantage of dropping our own function when we migrate to XPath 3.0

ebruchez: In principle I'm for reusing other peoples stuff, but for this ...

alain1: I agree with compatibility with XPath 3.0

nvdbleek: That is what we did for xpath 3.0

Steven: Anybody objects to using the xpath 3.0

ebruchez: OK, but if they change there format we should do it too
... … it is a lot of text in the XML serialisation function
... We could point to the xpath 3.0 function

<scribe> ACTION: Erik to import the XPath 3.0 serialize() function to XForms 2.0 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action05]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1947 - Import the XPath 3.0 serialize() function to XForms 2.0 [on Erik Bruchez - due 2013-05-15].

Steven: I propose not to block the SOAP issue to going to last call
... Next call in two weeks time

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Erik function should only allow one result element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to import the XPath 3.0 serialize() function to XForms 2.0 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Erik to propose a solution to support submitting multipart-post messages [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: function should only allow one result element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Nick Adjust schema file to allow one result element for Function element [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html#action04]
 
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-05-08 15:51:58 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Nick
Found ScribeNick: nvdbleek
Default Present: pfennell, [IPcaller], Steven, ebruchez, nvdbleek
Present: pfennell [IPcaller] Steven ebruchez nvdbleek
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2013May/0008
Found Date: 08 May 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/05/08-forms-minutes.html
People with action items: adjust erik file function nick schema

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


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]