W3C Forms teleconference September 15, 2010

* Present

Leigh Klotz, Xerox (minutes)
Nick van den Bleeken, Inventive Designers
Steven Pemberton, CWI/W3C (chair)
Charlie Wiecha, IBM
Uli Lissé, DreamLabs
Erik Bruchez, IBM
Philip Fennell, MarkLogic
John Boyer, IBM

* Agenda


* Previous Minutes


* Charlie Wiecha Announcement


Charlie Wiecha: I've accepted a new position within IBM. I will be somewhat afield of forms for the near future, and will be withdrawing from the Forms WG. I think there's a nice connection between document capture and forms. I think forms plays a role in BPM, but this is an unstructured capture. I can see them coming together from paper capture to electronic form. I'll be working on engineering work for right now though.
Steven Pemberton: That's really too bad. We'll definitely miss you. Good luck and I hope we'll be seeing you soon.
Charlie Wiecha: I won't be in Lyon either. I will continue talking with John as we're part of the same management structure.
Leigh Klotz: The ECM industry uses XForms extensively.
Charlie Wiecha: Our level of semantic interpretation adds value beyond capture and once we ship we'll look again.
Charlie Wiecha: I'll stay in touch.

* Lyon

Steven Pemberton: Who hasn't signed up but will be there physically?
Uli Lissé: I will be there.
Nick van: I still don't know.
Uli Lissé: What about Alain?
Steven Pemberton: I think maybe he said he wouldn't be coming. It's almost a direct train for you, Nick.
Nick van: It's not the travel, but a customer demo we've been working on for a year.
Steven Pemberton: Please sign up as soon as possible. Otherwise it will be Uli and I and a a telephone.
John Boyer: I don't know yet. Do you have to sign up to call by phone?
Steven Pemberton: I don't think so.
John Boyer: I need to work on trave approval.
Steven Pemberton: I say this regularly, but they need to move this to the beginning of the year.
John Boyer: Yes, end of year budget is difficult.

* Action Item Review


* NVDL and RNG

Philip Fennell: I tried the ZIP file and oXygen doesn't want the start element.
Leigh Klotz: We do have a simple XHTML+XForms RNC but with NVDL don't you need the
Steven Pemberton: We need a validator.
Leigh Klotz: Yes, we need a rec-track document.
Steven Pemberton: We discussed turning the XHTML + XForms attributes into XHTML+XForms documenting what people do.
Leigh Klotz: This is the schema for that, using NVDL.
Philip Fennell: So I will go back to the XML Schema and integrate Owen Newnan's comments.
Leigh Klotz: Yes, there are also some questions from Owen.

* Unregrets

John Boyer: Has anyone ever sent unregrets before?
Leigh Klotz: Unregrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.

* invalid binding expression error


Steven Pemberton: I got no answers.

* www-forms

John Boyer: Do we include tutorial and debugging on www-forms or do we split the list?
Leigh Klotz: We do have www-forms-editor.
John Boyer: That's for formal comments.
Leigh Klotz: Maybe we can move the formal comments there.
John Boyer: Or keep forms technology questions on www-forms.
Steven Pemberton: Or we could make a forms-help list.
John Boyer: Keep a separate list to sign up for. Or re-purpose www-forms and live with the traffic.
Steven Pemberton: Does anybody feel the level is excessive?
Leigh Klotz: If there is a bigger success, we'll get all mailing lists flooded. But I don't see it yet.
Erik Bruchez: Yes, there's less traffic. Splitting mailing lists may eliminate activity instead of reducing it.

Action 2010-09-15.1: Steven Pemberton to change descriptions of www-forms to allow forms use discussion.

Steven Pemberton: I'll research changing the description and add something.

* Wiki Spec

Leigh Klotz: I mentioned this on XML CG and was given another link which I can't get at the moment.

* XBL2


Steven Pemberton: I think Chris Lilley was asking for us to make a public statement. He wanted information about implementations.
Leigh Klotz: Orbeon uses XBL2. We're using it internally in Xerox.
Steven Pemberton: And Ubiquity?
John Boyer: In Firefox it uses XBL.
Erik Bruchez: I think XBL2 is not implementd in Firefox; as far as I remember they have the older version.
Steven Pemberton: Yes, XBL isn't anywhere except Firefox. The idea was to standardize it. They created XBL2. For a long time we had a working draft, and now this message from Ian Hixie saying that he's dropping a lot, including namespace support.
Erik Bruchez: You seem to have figured out that too much has been removed.
Steven Pemberton: Read: "I've dropped namespace support, made it part of HTML rather than its own language, dropped <style> and <script> in favour of HTML equivalents, dropped all the <handler> syntactic sugar (and redirected event forwarding to internal object instead), dropped <preload>, dropped mentions of XForms and XML Events, and so on."
Erik Bruchez: I personally wouldn't mind some stuff being removed from XBL2, such as the replication of XML events, key modifiers, and event filtering. I think there is some work to do there to make it inline with things that we've done in XForms. Dropping events isn't quite the right way to do that. If there is actually progress on XBL on the HTML side, and we could make sure whatever was done is usable...I'm not concerned about the XBL namespace or whether namespaces are supported, it's easy to add for us. If others are working on XBL, that we could leverage, that would be good.
Leigh Klotz: I think we should congratulate the HTML5 WG on making XBL available as Ubiquit and others will benefit, but we need to keep the spec separate and have the HTML5 profile and a namespace version as a separate document.
Erik Bruchez: Is there general interest in a component system for the HTML? If so, they may use it.
Steven Pemberton: May I suggest an action to send mail to HCG saying that this doesn't satisfy our needs, referring to this message? There's no coordination so far.

Action 2010-09-15.2: Leigh Klotz to send message about recent XBL2 news to HCG saying it doesn't meet our needs.

* base64 encoding for HTTP Basic Authentication - a gap in the XForms

function library? (RFE) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2010Sep/0012.html

Leigh Klotz: Erik summarized in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2010Sep/0017.html
Leigh Klotz: Erik, did you mean something beyond the "@" credentials in HTTP?
Erik Bruchez: It's too much to ask form authors to understand HTTP. You can put it in the URL, but in our implementation you can also put it in request attributes. You might not want to put it in the URL as it might reveal it in a log file. So perhaps it could be provided out of the box by XForms. And of course, there is a need for base64-encoded data as part of more general stuff.
John Boyer: We had base64 encode and decode in XForms 1.1, but we removed it because of decode problems with binary blobs not being XPath strings.

Leigh Klotz: When you use http://user:pass@example.com it doesn't send user:pass in the HTTP GET request. That's just a lexical coding and the wire transport is done using normal HTTP. I think we could add a user and password and possibly domain to the submission/resource element.
John Boyer: So we need to see what XHR does.
Leigh Klotz: I'd be willing to do the experiment.

Action 2010-09-15.3: Leigh Klotz to experiment with XHR authentication and supplying password authentication.

Leigh Klotz: What about <resource value="/path/to/foo" username="/path/to/user" password="/path/to/pas" />
Erik Bruchez: The resource element replaces an attribute. Adding those attributes breaks the assumption, so I'd prefer additional nested elements.
Steven Pemberton: I have a different view, that we realized that we should have made all our attributes dynamic ones in the first place, and in the cases where we had them already we created dynamic child elements but we used dynamic attributes for the new ones since you can make them static.
Erik Bruchez: XForms has some attribute that are XPath expressions (ref) and others that are better as literals. I think there's a distinction. I think if the resource were natively an XPath expression, the additional single quotes required in teh most common case would be confusing. That's why I like AVTs. Or, a nested element that allows you to do the same thing.
John Boyer: I think you can still do that on the resource. You can use the content of the resource to get the content. There's still a way to avoid single quotes.
Erik Bruchez: I don't like username and password on the resource element because it breaks.
Leigh Klotz: My reasons are two-fold: it shows the credentials are for the resource. The second is that it is equivalent to the lexical representation of http://username:password@.

Erik Bruchez: I'd like to see more consistency.
Leigh Klotz: It would be consistent in resource on load as well.
Nick van: I also would prefer the username and password on the parent element not the dynamic element, but this is just my opinion. and if you do basic authentication the username and pasword are REALM based. depending on the parameters another REALM could be requested

* IRC Log


* Meeting Ends