W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > July 2014

Re: ACTION-1970 - Propose list of page access functions

From: Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 15:32:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAc0PEVnayb=hm4SrL+ux3HSoW7iMn3gD9c2Mh=OKauySk2j-g@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-forms@w3.org, "public-xformsusers@w3.org" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
I have now added the new xf:location-param() function:

   https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#The_location-param.28.29_Function

Feedback welcome.

-Erik

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> wrote:
> All,
>
> I added more examples to this. Here is the diff:
>
>     https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/index.php?title=XPath_Expressions_Module&diff=4050&oldid=4044
>
> And the text:
>
>     https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#URI_Functions
>
> -Erik
>
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I added spec text for the new URI functions. Here is the diff:
>>
>>   https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/index.php?title=XPath_Expressions_Module&diff=4042&oldid=3947
>>
>> and the direct link to the section:
>>
>>   https://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#URI_Functions
>>
>> I would like to review and add examples for all functions. I have only
>> added a few examples so far.
>>
>> Feedback welcome,
>>
>> -Erik
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:31 PM, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Following our last call, the idea was to change the approach to the
>>> following:
>>>
>>> - provide one function to access the document location
>>> - provide general-purpose URL destructuring functions
>>>
>>> The proposal becomes as follows:
>>>
>>> This function returns a URI representing the location of the document:
>>>
>>>     xf:location-uri() as xs:anyURI
>>>
>>> (This is expected to be an HTTP or HTTPS URL for practical purposes.)
>>>
>>> The following functions all take a URI as first parameter, and return a
>>> specific part. The various parts are inspired by the Java URI class, which I
>>> think is reasonable: [1]
>>>
>>>     xf:uri-scheme($uri as xs:anyURI) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-scheme-specific-part($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as
>>> xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-authority($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-user-info($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-host($uri as xs:anyURI) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-port($uri as xs:anyURI) as xs:integer?
>>>     xf:uri-path($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-query($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as xs:string?
>>>     xf:uri-fragment($uri as xs:anyURI, $raw as xs:boolean) as xs:string?
>>>
>>> Each function may not return a given component, in which case it returns the
>>> empty sequence.
>>>
>>> Some of these functions take an optional $raw parameter [2], which defaults
>>> to `false()`. When $raw is `true()`, the value is returned "without
>>> interpreting any escaped octets".
>>>
>>> The following two functions, which were the ones initially desired, are
>>> added:
>>>
>>>     xf:param-names($uri as xs:anyURI) as xs:string*
>>>     xf:param-values($uri as xs:anyURI, $name as xs:string) as xs:string*
>>>
>>> They only return a non-empty sequence for hierarchical URIs which have a
>>> query part. The first one returns all parameter names, possibly with
>>> duplicates, in the order in which they appear. The second one returns all
>>> parameter values for a given parameter name, in the order in which they
>>> appear.
>>>
>>> Alternatively, these two functions could apply directly to a query string,
>>> rather than to a URI.
>>>
>>> Examples:
>>>
>>> 1. Get the current path:
>>>
>>>   xf:uri-path(xf:location-uri())
>>>
>>> 2. Get the first "foo"  URL parameter:
>>>
>>>   xf:param-values(xf:location-uri(), 'foo')[1]
>>>
>>> I think the above would be pretty comprehensive as far as figuring out URI
>>> parts.
>>>
>>> One question is whether to standardize all of this directly in XForms, or to
>>> request broader feedback, for example from EXPath [3].
>>>
>>> Feedback welcome,
>>>
>>> -Erik
>>>
>>> [1] http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/net/URI.html
>>> [2] Which in XPath means each function has two versions.
>>> [3] http://expath.org/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> wrote:
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> Here is my list of proposed functions related to the page location
>>>> (browser) or request information (server).
>>>>
>>>> I think, at the very least, we would like something to help with query
>>>> parameters. Something like:
>>>>
>>>>     xf:parameter-names() as xs:string*
>>>>     xf:parameter-values($name as xs:string) as xs:string*
>>>>
>>>> We can go further and provide access to more details of the location:
>>>>
>>>> Entire URL:
>>>>
>>>>     xf:location-url() as xs:anyURI
>>>>
>>>> URL parts, following mostly :
>>>>
>>>>     xf:location-protocol() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-host() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-port() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-path() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-query() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-hash() as xs:string
>>>>
>>>> (The browser has "pathname" instead of "path", and "search" instead of
>>>> "query". Those sound a bit antique and odd.)
>>>>
>>>> Server implementations are not expected to be able to provide
>>>> `xf:location-hash()`, as that is known by the client only.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, the following username/password are possible but of
>>>> dubious utility:
>>>>
>>>>     xf:location-username() as xs:string
>>>>     xf:location-password() as xs:string
>>>>
>>>> On the client, this would be available if you have:
>>>>
>>>>     http://foo:bar@example.org/
>>>>
>>>> At this point it seems (not verified) that only Firefox supports
>>>> username/password. On the server, this would translate into obtaining
>>>> the username/password of a BASIC authentication, which may or may not
>>>> be available.
>>>>
>>>> On naming:
>>>>
>>>> 1. We could use a common prefix, e.g. `location-` for all. But
>>>> `xf:location-parameter-names()` and `xf:location-parameter-values()`
>>>> become very  long in that case.
>>>>
>>>> 2. We could also use a different namespace URI for what we would call
>>>> a "request" or "location" module.
>>>>     - Pros: shorter names, like `l:port()`, and a clearer sense of
>>>> modularity
>>>>     - Cons: a new namespace, and people don't like namespaces.
>>>>
>>>> Feedback welcome!
>>>>
>>>> -Erik
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2014 22:33:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:14:10 UTC