W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > July 2007

Re: serialization=""

From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:06:37 -0700
To: ebruchez@orbeon.com
Cc: "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>, public-forms-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3EF7CBF9.3800AD00-ON88257324.00792AA8-88257324.00797567@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Erik,

Given that both "" and "none" are not mimetypes, I agree with you that 
there is no advantage to "", and now that I see serialization="none" in 
the spec, I agree that it is clearer than serialization="".  Please see 
the latest editor's draft available from the website for the changes. Good 
call.

Cheers,
John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
STSM: Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher
Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
IBM Victoria Software Lab
E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com 

Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer





Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com> 
Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
07/26/2007 10:46 AM
Please respond to
ebruchez@orbeon.com


To
"Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
cc

Subject
Re: serialization=""







Good point.

But I should point out that there have been lots of complaints that XML 
namespaces are confusing ;-)

-Erik

Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com wrote:
> and when using namespaces xmlns=""
> 
> Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development
> Inventive Designers
> Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
> Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
> Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
> 
> 
> 
> "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com> 
> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
> 07/25/2007 11:08 PM
> 
> To
> <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
> cc
> 
> Subject
> RE: serialization=""
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just FYI we also use a "" in includenamespaceprefixes.
> Leigh. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:public-forms-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Erik Bruchez
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 1:48 PM
> To: Forms WG (new)
> Subject: serialization=""
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> We thought about this at Orbeon and we think that using a blank value 
> for the attribute remains awkward. It is pretty much unseen in XML-based
> 
> languages out there, and it could also indicate that the developer has 
> forgotten to put a value for the attribute.
> 
> "none" is not a media type, but neither is a blank string. So I am going
> 
> to be a flip-flopper here and get back to the idea that "none" is 
> preferable to an empty attribute.
> 
> -Erik
> 


-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Thursday, 26 July 2007 22:06:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 October 2013 22:06:44 UTC