Spec text available for Section 7 (PR#139)

Hi Erik,

Your wording is now placed into the spec, adding the bit for catching 
undefined variables.

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
10/31/2007 06:33 PM
Please respond to
ebruchez@orbeon.com


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

Subject
Re: Fw: Section 7 (PR#139)







John,

> Your wording for #139 looks great to me.
> If you have no objections, I'd like to include mention of variables too 
> because someone can put a variable reference into the expression, and 
> that would be syntactically correct, but we should fail because we 
> define no variables as in scope...  OK by you?

Sure.

> Regarding the commentary in 7.12, it's an informative note which 
> suggests that processors may do the behavior.   Do you think XPath 2.0 
> will cause us to escalate that to a higher requirement level?

Not necessarily. It's just that XPath 2.0 actually defines static vs. 
dynamic errors, which would enable us to easily define how an 
implementation should perform a static analysis of XPath expressions at 
loading time, with the main purpose of early error reporting.

-Erik

-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
http://www.orbeon.com/