12:57:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #forms
12:57:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/10-forms-irc
12:57:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:57:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #forms
12:57:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
12:57:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:57:47 <trackbot> Meeting: XForms Users Community Group Teleconference
12:57:47 <trackbot> Date: 10 May 2017
12:57:56 <Steven> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017May/0008
12:58:06 <Steven> Steven has changed the topic to: Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017May/0008
12:58:39 <Steven> Chair: Steven
13:00:00 <pfennell> pfennell has joined #forms
13:00:58 <Steven> Present: Alain, Erik, Philip, Steven
13:01:27 <Steven> Topic: ACTION-2118: Simplify deferred update text.
13:01:27 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Apr/0015
13:01:39 <Steven> Steven: This is from the last meeting.
13:02:08 <Steven> Steven: Please check how deferred updates have been treated in the new text.
13:02:21 <Steven> Topic: <update/> (two questions)
13:02:21 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Apr/0013
13:02:21 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Apr/0014
13:02:37 <Steven> Steven: Since we agreed to add an <update/> action, should we add an update()
13:02:37 <Steven> method as well?
13:02:56 <Steven> Steven: Does <update/> need a matching event, or can it make do with the existing
13:02:56 <Steven> rebuild, recalculate, and revalidate?
13:03:41 <Steven> Steven: My feeling is that we need the first one.
13:04:04 <Steven> Erik: The methods are not in general very useful; either we should deprecate, or make it consistent.
13:04:24 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to add update() method
13:04:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2119 - Add update() method [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-05-17].
13:06:30 <Steven> Steven: recalculate etc. events cause the thing to happen.
13:06:56 <Steven> Erik: You don't really need the event if the action already does the work.
13:08:08 <Steven> ... hmm, it's not even clear when the events are dispatched,
13:08:40 <Steven> ACTION: Steven to research the relationship between the recalculate (etc) events and the actions
13:08:40 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2120 - Research the relationship between the recalculate (etc) events and the actions [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-05-17].
13:08:58 <Steven> Topic: The copy Element
13:08:58 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Apr/0012
13:09:30 <Steven> Steven: I have made the change so that they send the event to the same element
13:09:51 <Steven> Topic: @incremental
13:09:51 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017May/0001
13:10:57 <Steven> Steven: I will tryt and formulate new text to describe what actually happens.
13:11:03 <Steven> s/tryt/rey/
13:11:16 <Steven> ACTION: Steven reformulate text for @incremental
13:11:16 <trackbot> Created ACTION-2121 - Reformulate text for @incremental [on Steven Pemberton - due 2017-05-17].
13:11:32 <Steven> Topic: Validation and optional fields
13:11:32 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017May/0003
13:12:29 <Steven> Steven: I think this would be a beneficial backwards-incompatibility.
13:12:52 <Steven> ... existing forms would still work (because they program around it), and new forms would be easier to write
13:13:45 <Steven> Erik: It could be noticable if the field is say an integer, but isn't explicitely 'required'.
13:14:36 <Steven> ... then the missing field used to be a type error.
13:15:22 <Steven> ... It could be many fields are required, without having the required mip, just because of the type.
13:16:07 <Steven> ... We will add this behaviour; not sure exactly how, with respect to backwards compatibility.
13:16:30 <Steven> Steven: We could use the @version attribute
13:18:04 <Steven> ... on model
13:19:27 <Steven> Erik: We could say that the xforms version 2.0 triggers the new behaviour.
13:20:08 <Steven> ... that would be one way
13:20:15 <Steven> Steven: Let's think about it for a week.
13:20:43 <Steven> ... when I read your email, I was kicking myself that we didn't do it before.
13:21:31 <Steven> Topic: Dynamic dependencies
13:21:31 <Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xformsusers/2017Mar/0012
13:21:31 <Steven> [Awaiting an example]
13:21:37 <Steven> Steven: Just a reminder
13:21:44 <Steven> Erik: It's on the top of the list.
13:21:46 <Steven> Topic: AOB
13:21:53 <Steven> [None]
13:22:17 <Steven> [ADJOURN]
13:22:22 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
13:22:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/10-forms-minutes.html Steven
13:23:36 <Steven> s/recalculate etc. events cause the thing to happen./recalculate etc. events cause the thing to happen, but not the other way round./
13:23:38 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
13:23:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/10-forms-minutes.html Steven
13:24:18 <Steven> s/rey/try/
13:24:22 <Steven> rrsagent, make minutes
13:24:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/10-forms-minutes.html Steven
15:01:39 <Zakim> Zakim has left #forms
16:02:13 <ebruchez> ebruchez has joined #forms