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

Re: A number of issues from Aaron are missing (action for Steven)

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 15:39:42 +0200
To: "John Boyer" <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
Cc: public-forms@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.tuhb8gznsmjzpq@acer3010.wlan.cwi.nl>

On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 16:59:18 +0200, John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> wrote:

> Hi Steven,

Hi John,

> Can I please get your help in getting Aaron's last call issues into the
> system.

Sure, but don't forget it was Uli who volunteered to work on the upkeep of  
the issue tracking.

> Issue #37 is in the trash because it states that Aaron's 39 issues from
> April 30 was broken into separate mails.
>
> First of all, the issue only has the first 26 of the 30 issues in it, so
> please watch out for that.

If you mean issue 37, then you'll see at the bottom "Message of length  
7591 truncated" and a button "Full message", which shows all 39 issues.

I see all 39 separately in the data base. UI/118 has 31-39

> Second, there does not even seem to be a topic for the "Structure"  
> section
> of the spec (Section 3), where Aaron's issues 5 through 14 go.  However,
> some issues on Section 3 from you, Steven, are in the Model topic (which  
> I
> might have thought was for section 4)

The names of the folders don't exactly match the names of the sections,  
but section 3 is essentially about the model, so I guess that's why it got  
called that.

You can just create a new folder and move issues there if you miss one.

> Third, I think "Model" might be the right topic for Aaron's 15 through  
> 19,
> but I think we need one issue for #16 and another for #15 + #17-#19.

They are all comments on section 4, processing model, so I guess that's  
why they ended up there ;-)

To split an issue mail up, you can re-edit the mail, and 'redirect' it  
(assuming your email agent can do that), so that it gets sent as if coming  
 from Aaron.

> Fourth, #1 and #15 are good examples because they are covered by other
> people's issues.  So, it is unclear if they are not entered because of
> that, but the problem with not entering them is that *Aaron* would never
> get a response to the issue.  It seems like we need to enter all of his
> issues even if they are duplicates with others.

#1 is at Model/112
#15 is at Events/115

Or have I misunderstood what you mean?

> Fifth, His section 7 comments don't seem to show up under XPath.

XPath/116

> Sixth, could I please have your help tracing through the rest of his
> issues to make sure they appear, as I gave up looking at about this  
> point.

As far as I can see, they are all there.

> Seventh, please make sure #28 is an issue by itself.

Do you mean "28) Section 8.1.1 - the list of events that happen when a  
form control goes from being irrelevant to relevant ->  
xforms-value-changed only MIGHT be generated.  A control can become  
relevant without the value of the control's bound node changing at all."?  
Just send it as a separate mail.

> Finally, note that I have already implemented almost all of the changes
> needed, so I just need issues made so I can compose and send the replies.

You can send more than one reply to a message, but if you really need to  
split an email up, then editing and resending it will do the trick.

Best wishes,

Steven
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 13:39:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 October 2013 22:06:43 UTC