12:54:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #forms
12:54:03 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-irc
12:54:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:54:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #forms
12:54:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
12:54:06 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:54:07 <trackbot> Meeting: XForms Users Community Group Teleconference
12:54:08 <trackbot> Date: 29 March 2017
12:54:32 <Steven> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0025
12:54:41 <Steven> Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0025
12:54:44 <Steven> Chair: Steven
13:00:42 <pfennell> pfennell has joined #forms
13:01:35 <Steven> Present: Alain, Erik, Philip, Steven
13:01:47 <Steven> Topic: xf:submission/@relevant proposal
13:01:47 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0020
13:03:08 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0028.html
13:07:05 <Steven> Steven: Did you see Philip's question
13:07:16 <Steven> Erik: Let me give an example (if I can think of one)
13:07:20 <ebruchez> <visa>some text<number/>M</visa>
13:07:25 <Steven> s/tion/tion?/
13:07:59 <Steven> Erik: <visa> is non relevant
13:08:10 <Steven> ... but it is complex
13:08:45 <Steven> ... you can't bind to the text of visa, so should it also be emptied?
13:09:29 <Steven> ... (because there are no empty text nodes, so the control would become nonrelevant henceforth)
13:10:46 <Steven> Steven: Do you have a use-case why it *shouldn't* be emptied?
13:10:51 <Steven> Erik: I don;t think so.
13:10:56 <Steven> s/;/'/
13:11:34 <Steven> Erik: Though there might be whitespace between elements, which would get lost
13:12:03 <pfennell> If visa of <visa><number>123456</number></visa> is made non-relevant by an action will number lose it's text node? If number is of type xs:integer then that empty node would raise a validation error.
13:13:02 <Steven> Philip: If the number got emptied it wouldn;t validate on the service side
13:13:14 <Steven> Steven: That would be your own responsibility.
13:14:37 <Steven> Steven: emptying the fields is an acceptable usecase; I've needed it myself in the past.
13:16:24 <Steven> Steven: I proposed nonrelevant="keep|remove|empty"
13:16:33 <Steven> Alain: Fine
13:16:41 <Steven> Philip: OK
13:16:47 <Steven> Erik: OK
13:17:06 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to add @nonrelevant according to https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0021.html
13:17:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2115 - Add @nonrelevant according to https://lists.w3.org/archives/public/public-xformsusers/2017mar/0021.html [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].
13:17:33 <Steven> Topic: Deferred updates
13:17:33 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0022
13:18:30 <Steven> Steven: Point one, does it need to be done with an event?
13:18:41 <Steven> Erik: I've never liked this.
13:19:40 <Steven> Steven: I'll investigate getting rid of those events during processing.
13:20:12 <Steven> Steven: Point two, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0023.html
13:21:41 <Steven> Steven: His point seems to be that these details don't need to be exposed in the spec
13:22:30 <Steven> Erik: If you do two set values after each other, there is no recalculation between the two
13:22:41 <Steven> s/set value/setvalue/
13:23:09 <Steven> Erik: Similarly to the UI, but that may be less of a problem.
13:24:12 <Steven> Erik: The alternative would be to have all actions cause an upadte
13:24:17 <Steven> s/adte/date/
13:26:41 <Steven> Steven: Isn't it the case that this only arises in an action?
13:27:18 <Steven> ... if we just said that the model doesn't get updated until the end of an action, we wouldn't need to describe it with the deferred update mechanism.
13:29:25 <Steven> Erik: I wonder if Michael's question is just about that.
13:31:28 <alain1> alain1 has joined #forms
13:31:48 <Steven> Steven: It seems if we could express it without saying how, only what you want to happen, it would be more along our lines of working anyway
13:33:03 <Steven> Steven: I'll look at it this week, and see what can be done to simplify it.
13:33:19 <Steven> Topic: Serialization as multipart/related
13:33:19 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0024
13:35:24 <Steven> Steven: I don't know how much multipart/ is used
13:35:28 <Steven> Alain: Nor do I
13:35:39 <Steven> Erik: Would this be possible in a web browser?
13:35:43 <Steven> Alain: I think so.
13:35:57 <Steven> Steven: Shal we give it a try?
13:36:03 <Steven> s/shal/shall/
13:36:17 <Steven> Steven: or is it not important enough?
13:36:22 <Steven> Philip: Give it a try.
13:36:34 <Steven> Erik: I think people try to avoid it
13:36:42 <Steven> ... but I think it is implemented on servers
13:36:54 <Steven> Erik: It is a complication
13:37:12 <Steven> ... but it is how browsers might send multiple uploads
13:37:26 <Steven> ... I have no good feel, but I would like to have something like this.
13:37:32 <Steven> ... It is still a 'thing'.
13:38:06 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to spec up <part/> proposal.
13:38:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2116 - Spec up <part/> proposal. [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].
13:38:36 <Steven> Steven: AOB
13:38:41 <Steven> [None]
13:38:46 <Steven> [ADJOURN]
13:39:16 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
13:39:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html Steven
13:41:03 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to investigate removing the need for deferred update flags
13:41:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2117 - Investigate removing the need for deferred update flags [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-04-05].
13:41:06 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
13:41:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-forms-minutes.html Steven
15:25:53 <Zakim> Zakim has left #forms