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

Re: XForms Future Features Development, was RE: Schema issue: Order dependence of submission child elements

From: Joern Turner <joern.turner@dreamlab.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:42:26 +0200
Message-ID: <46AFBAD2.6030805@dreamlab.net>
To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
CC: "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>

John Boyer wrote:
> 
> It is already mentioned as a future feature under 
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/Better_componentization_of_XForms_modules 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the working group is not doing a good job right now of getting 
> busy on developing the future features concepts.  
> 
> Please consider this email as another encouragement to put a block of 
> time in your busy schedule to visit the wiki 
> (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XForms_Future_Features) and add 
> some content please.
I'd really like to do that but i'm always getting immutable pages. I've 
registered and logged in but i never can edit any page. Anyone else 
experiencing this problem or am i doing something wrong.

Joern
> 
> Thank you,
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *"Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>*
> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
> 
> 07/27/2007 10:36 AM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	<ebruchez@orbeon.com>, "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	RE: Schema issue: Order dependence of submission child elements
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I raised the issue again at the Amsterdam F2F and we decided to stay
> with XML Schema for XForms 1.1.
> For XForms 1.2/2.0 though we should consider both allowing RNG to be
> used in the model and describing XForms itself using RNG.
> Micah Dubinko did an RNG for XForms 1.0, and I've updated it since, but
> haven't published it again.  I should get around to it though!
> 
> Leigh.
> P.S. Did you see this, which I found about via Robin Cover's newsletter:
> Ten Reasons to Model XML with RELAX NG , Not W3C XML Schema
> Alex Brown, Griffin Brown Weblog
> http://www.griffinbrown.co.uk/blog/PermaLink,guid,9aebb083-a961-42b1-974
> 8-a57e06a0f19a.aspx
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:public-forms-request@w3.org]
> On Behalf Of Erik Bruchez
> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 1:13 AM
> To: Forms WG (new)
> Subject: Re: Schema issue: Order dependence of submission child elements
> 
> 
> I don't have a solution, not being an absolute schema specialist, but it
> 
> always feels good to point out that with Relax NG, this is extremely
> easy to do and you don't even have to look up a tutorial or a spec! It
> would look like this and be immediately understandable by even somebody
> who has never written any Relax NG:
> 
> <interleave>
>     <optional>
>         <element name="resource">...</element>
>     </optional>
>     <optional>
>         <element name="method">...</element>
>     </optional>
>     <zeroOrMore>
>         <element name="header">...</element>
>     </zeroOrMore>
> </interleave>
> 
> -Erik
> 
> John Boyer wrote:
>  >
>  > The issue of ordered children of submission came up on the Wednesday
>  > telecon.
>  >
>  > On the telecon it was stated that it was hard in XML schema to specify
> 
>  > child elements that were both optional and in a required order.
>  >
>  > I preserved this aspect of submission in the current editor's draft
>  > because I do not understand why it is hard, whereas I can easily see
> it
>  > being harder to write a schema that says the child is optional but
> could
>  > appear anywhere in the list of child elements.  It is easy to see how
> to
>  > do it if the schema also allows the child to appear any number of
> times,
>  > but this is not what we want.
>  >
>  > Isn't it just a case of saying that the submission has a resource
>  > element with minoccurs=0 then a method element with minoccurs=0 then a
> 
>  > header element with minoccurs=0 and maxoccurs=unbounded?
>  >
>  > Is there an easy way to say "In any order, one or zero resource plus
> one
>  > or zero method plus zero or more header"?  
>  >
>  > 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
>  >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
> http://www.orbeon.com/
> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2007 22:38:42 UTC

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