W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms-editor@w3.org > April 2002

RE: Response to Last Call Message 18

From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:26:50 -0700
Message-ID: <E840F0B7E6189547BDB91DA8BF2228AB28C3E4@csmail.cardiff.com>
To: "'www-forms-editor@w3.org'" <www-forms-editor@w3.org>
Cc: "'Mikko Honkala (E-mail)'" <honkkis@tml.hut.fi>, "'thierry MICHEL (E-mail)'" <tmichel@w3.org>
Mikko,

All your comments have been incorporated, with the following notes:

* In a few places, you ask 'is this the same as the DOM event XX?'
The general answer is no, since we don't require a DOM implementation to be
present. We have been given clearance to create all new events. That's also
why we have the xforms prefix on all the events.

* Regarding events xforms-refresh, xforms-revalidate, and
xforms-recalculate, you comment that your implementation always keeps the
everything refreshed, revalidated, and recalculated, making these events
unnecessary.

These events are needed because they actually define what it means to
refresh, etc.

Also at one point, we intended to make it possible to limit the amount of
refreshing, recalculating, etc. done on small devices by listening for these
events and stopping them from reaching. (We probably need to make the XForms
Actions <refresh>, etc. do their job without sending an event for this to
work, however)


I hope this is sufficient to resolve your Last Call request.

Thanks,

.micah

Original Message:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Feb/0004.html
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2002 19:26:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 June 2009 18:12:11 GMT