- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:48:10 +0100
- To: "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
- Cc: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com, "Charles F Wiecha" <wiecha@us.ibm.com>, boyerj@ca.ibm.com, "Forms WG (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>, public-forms-request@w3.org
Hi Leigh, One of the main reasons I started changing the schemas, many moons ago, was to address exactly this problem. As you know, in the course of that I also looked at making them work with XHTML M12N (which involved changes to XHTML M12N itself, and those changes have been incorporated into the specification). So the work to make XForms an XHTML M12N module is largely complete, so the suggestion I made the other day was that it is probably best to do the bare minimum on the current schemas in order to get everything to last call. Of course, people are welcome to try to do more than that with the current schemas -- it's none of my business :) -- but I can say for certain that it will involve quite a lot of work. Regards, Mark On 26/09/2007, Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com> wrote: > > Are we planning to leave in the botch that everything is defined as a > toplevel element? > I.e. label/help/hint/alert/choices etc. (and even submission, instance) > are all available for the host language to be incorporated anywhere? > At one point we had a request to fix this by making them work only > inside their correct spots, then someone pointed out that that's why we > can do label inside group. What was decided for the modularized schemas > that we're postponing? Do they define all these child elements at > toplevel or do they inhibit their use by the host language? > > Leigh. > > -- 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 Wednesday, 26 September 2007 17:48:29 UTC