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

Re: ACTION NEEDED (Charlie, Nick, Leigh): XForms 1.1 schema update

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:28:54 +0100
Message-ID: <a707f8300709210328l1ad587cds61ca0bd9d1ac9427@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com" <Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com>
Cc: "John Boyer" <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>, "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>, "new Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org>, public-forms-request@w3.org, "Charles F Wiecha" <wiecha@us.ibm.com>

Hi Nick,

A lot depends on what we're trying to achieve here.

The XForms 1.0 schemas have been pretty unusable in my experience.
Trying to edit XForms documents using these schemas in programs like
oXygen is painful, because of their structure. I know of two
situations where companies have edited the schemas themselves in order
to make them usable in an editor.

So the 1.1 schemas were structured in such a way as to try to solve
these problems, as well as being designed to harmonise with the M12N
framework--in fact, the M12N framework was also modified so that it
could support XForms 1.1 as a module.

But....

I understand that schemas tend to be a kind of poor relation to the
specification. And if the group thinks that the approach of just
making quick changes to the 1.0 schemas is the best way to go, so as
to meet the _formal_ requirements for getting to CR, then I'm not
going to argue. :)

I'll be finishing off the M12N-based schemas anyway, so the work will
not be wasted. Myself and Shane have been doing a lot of work around
M12N, and alongside changes we made to the framework to accommodate
XForms, we also created modules for RDFa. So, having an
M12N-compatible version of XForms 1.1 would be very useful in this
context, but I guess there is no reason why that could not be made
available separately, if the group decides to go with the idea of
modifying the 1.0 schemas.

Regards,

Mark

On 21/09/2007, Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
<Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Sounds good if we can use your expertise to update the modularized
> schemes. I'm just a newbe in this area with no time to work on the XForms
> 1.1 schema, but the fact that we need an updated schema before we can go
> to CR is convincing me to sacrifice some more spare time to the XForms WG.
>
> But after a quick look to the current XForms 1.1 schema I noticed that
> there is still a lot commented out, and that the schemes aren't valid
> schemes yet. Is it correct that the modularized schemes sent by John
> aren't valid yet, or they just appearing invalid due to my limited schema
> knowledge?
> I also noted that the XForms 1.1 schema is build on top of the modularized
> XForms 1.0 schema, what is really nice I think. But is the better
> definition in XForms 1.1 of 'core form controls' and 'container form
> controls' not going to be a problem, or are we going to backport this
> change also in the xforms-10-ui.xsd?
>
> I also think that John captured the most important changes in his e-mail
> (those 5 items).
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development
> Inventive Designers
> Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
> Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
> Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
>
> public-forms-request@w3.org wrote on 09/21/2007 10:38:54 AM:
>
> >
> > Hi Nick,
> >
> > No disrespect to anyone here but I would doubt you would get this done
> > this side of Xmas if you start from scratch. There is a lot of work in
> > the current schemas, and a lot of problems have been solved. In
> > particular you need to understand XHTML Modularisation 1.1, since a
> > lot of time was spent to make the M12N framework and XForms 1.1 work
> > together.
> >
> > If you have been working on establishing the differences between the
> > versions then it sounds like all you would need me to do is help you
> > find the right places to change in the schemas.
> >
> > So my suggestion would be to let me get my involvement in the RDFa
> > specs out of the way, and then I could probably help you to finish the
> > schemas in no time at all. I have been working almost non-stop on RDFa
> > stuff for quite a while now, and XForms has had to take a back seat,
> > I'm afraid. But today we are releasing syntax and primer documents to
> > the workgroup responsible for the RDFa taskforce (hurray! :)) which
> > means I should be able to find some time next week to look at the
> > schemas with you.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 21/09/2007, Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
> > <Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > John and other interested ones,
> > >
> > > I spent quite some time to get the resolutions and action items out of
> the
> > > minutes of the ftf and previous call. I also spent more time then
> expected
> > > (several hours) to convert Steven's version of the differences between
> > > XForms 1.1 and XForms 1.0 and I'm now near a first pass in converting
> it
> > > to Spec XML. But the structure/layout is not yet XForms spec worthy. I
> > > think I need definitly some hours to make it something that can be
> used to
> > > put in our spec. I also have the examples for read-only that need to
> be
> > > made. If these have greater priority then the schema I won't be able
> to do
> > > any schema related work next week, because I think I have more then
> one
> > > day work left for the action items I previously mentioned.
> > >
> > > I don't know if Charlie or MarkB can give us a status of the current
> > > modularized version of the XForms schema, but if this is nearly done,
> I
> > > would prefer working on that, otherwise we will just throw away the
> work
> > > Charlie and MarkB put into that.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development
> > > Inventive Designers
> > > Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
> > > Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
> > > Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
> > > Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
> > > 09/21/2007 02:32 AM
> > >
> > > To
> > > Charles F Wiecha <wiecha@us.ibm.com>,
> > > Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com, "Klotz, Leigh"
> > > <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
> > > cc
> > > Forms WG (new) <public-forms@w3.org>
> > > Subject
> > > ACTION NEEDED (Charlie, Nick, Leigh): XForms 1.1 schema update
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We had hoped to get some time on this during the face to face meeting,
> but
> > > the last call issues proved too time consuming (though I would
> > > characterize our progress as outstanding).
> > >
> > > This still leaves us in a precarious position of needing to have the
> spec
> > > ready for CR transition before the publication moratorium that will
> > > precede the tech plenary.  I need you, Charlie, Nick and Leigh, to
> help
> > > out by updating the XForms 1.1 schema.
> > >
> > > The idea is that we need
> > >
> > > 1) big update for submission
> > > 2) big update for actions (e.g. additions to insert, delete, toggle,
> > > setfocus, and remove actions we don't have like close, duplicate,
> > > destroy).
> > > 3) small update for UI (e.g. output element)
> > > 4) small update on model (e.g. version) and instance (e.g. src and
> > > resource)
> > > 5) Make sure schema reflects definition of "core form controls"
> > > 6) Many new datatypes in Section 5 (empties and email and card-number)
> > >
> > > Starting tomorrow, I need you guys to please please please begin
> > > exchanging some email on the list above to divide up the tasks and get
> > > this done.  We need to have an idea of how long it will take given the
> > > "one day a week" commitment you and your organization made.  I would
> > > recommend one person to take submission, one to take actions, and a
> third
> > > to do the rest.
> > >
> > > The files begin with
> > > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2007/XForms-11-Schema.xsd, but there
> are
> > > several other files.
> > >
> > > To make this as easy as possible, here are the files, as far as I can
> see.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
> > > [attachment "xforms-10-model.xsd" deleted by Nick Van den
> > > Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment "xforms-10-handler-export.xsd"
> > > deleted by Nick Van den Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment
> > > "xforms-10-handler.xsd" deleted by Nick Van den Bleeken/Inventive
> Group]
> > > [attachment "xforms-10-export.xsd" deleted by Nick Van den
> > > Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment "xforms-10-datatypes.xsd" deleted
> by
> > > Nick Van den Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment
> "XForms-11-Schema.xsd"
> > > deleted by Nick Van den Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment
> > > "xforms-10-ui.xsd" deleted by Nick Van den Bleeken/Inventive Group]
> > > [attachment "xforms-10-submission.xsd" deleted by Nick Van den
> > > Bleeken/Inventive Group] [attachment "xforms-10-rules.xsd" deleted by
> Nick
> > > Van den Bleeken/Inventive Group]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer:
> > >
> > > http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >   Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer
> >
> >   mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
> >   http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com
> >
> >   standards. innovation.
> >
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer:
>
> http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer
>
>


-- 
  Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer

  mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
  http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com

  standards. innovation.
Received on Friday, 21 September 2007 10:29:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 October 2013 22:06:45 UTC