XForms Users Community Group Teleconference

15 Feb 2017


See also: IRC log


Erik, Steven
Alain, Philip


JSON content


Steven: I did the edits, fairly striaghtforward, and I left it vague about what it means for a JSON value to enter this system.


<trackbot> ACTION-2111 -- Steven Pemberton to Refine the spectext about recognising if a incoming alue is json or not. -- due 2017-02-15 -- OPEN

<trackbot> https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/xforms/actions/2111

close ACTION-2111

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-2111.



* At the start of a recalculate, there is a, possibly empty, list L of

instance nodes whose values may have been changed, e.g., by user input or

by a setvalue action.

* All nodes in L, if any, and nodes that are computationally dependent on

nodes in L must be recalculated.

* Only a single recalculation of each compute that is computationally

dependent on elements in L may be performed.

* A compute must be recalculated before any computes that are

computationally dependent on the instance node associated with it.

* If a compute is computationally dependent on an element in L and part of

a circular dependency, then an xforms-compute-error event must be

dispatched to the model element.

Steven: I suspect we can use the same sort of language with rebuild as well

Erik: Yeah

Steven: Then that would allow different implementations, just as you Erik have combined recalc with revalidate.

Erik: We have to say something about how the graph can depend on single values; we shouldn;t make life hard for implementors

Steven: I agree; but as long as we specify it right, implementors can implement just as they like. However, we should warn for the edgecases
... It's the section of the spec I'm working on, so I'll give it a try.

Serialization as multipart/related



Steven: So one possiblity could be having a 'magic' data type, that holds the string value of a URI, but on submit it is recognised and dereferenced and the binary submitted.

Erik: That solves one of the problems, but not all of them.
... I was wondering if there are other 'magic' things in the spec.

<ebruchez> "Subsequent part requirements"

<ebruchez> Serialization as multipart/related

Erik: This section doesn't say where some of the values come from.
... it could be stored in the data, or out of band.

Steven: Do you have any recommendations?

Erik: So we need information about the to-be-dereferenced URI, and then details about the parts
... we could say it is implementation -dependent

Steven: That would make it hard to write interoperable forms

Erik: We could clarify that the purpose is to handle things populated by upload
... a piece of text that says the type of the attachment is stored at the URI is populated in the instance.

Steven: I need longer to think about this.
... if you could send an email with details of how you might implement it, that might help to crystallise the thoughts.

Erik: We do one of the muliti-parts, and we figure out how to identify the parts. I'll send an email.


Erik: You went to XML Prague.

Steven: Well attended. The proceedings are online.
... XPath 3 is just about ready.


Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.148 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/02/15 14:42:25 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.148  of Date: 2016/10/11 12:55:14  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/TH/Th/
Succeeded: s/dep/-dep/
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Steven
Inferring Scribes: Steven
Present: Erik Steven

WARNING: Fewer than 3 people found for Present list!

Regrets: Alain Philip
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Feb/0019
Found Date: 15 Feb 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/02/15-forms-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]