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

Formal Responses to XForms CR comments

From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:47:31 -0800
Message-ID: <BD2DBD26EE0BAA48B1A425C7BE7923002D005E@csmail.cardiff.com>
To: "'AndrewWatt2001@aol.com'" <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>, www-forms-editor@w3.org

Andrew,

Regarding the following 29 comments: thank you, please see the individual
responses.

XForms CR - 7.6, 7.7, 7.8 Methods/Functions?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0004.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 2.1 Discrepancy between code and graphic
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0005.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 3.2.2 Typo
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0007.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 3.2.3 "First-node Rule" Ambiguity
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0008.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 3.3.1
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0011.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 7.4.1
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0041.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 7.4.4
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0042.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 7.7.5 Typo?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0044.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - 3.2.5 Model Item Property Attributes
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0045.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - A further departure from XPath 1.0?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0030.html
Fixed.

XForms CR - Instance Data and Instance Data Nodes
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0035.html
Fixed.

XForms CR : 13 - Glossary of Terms
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0002.html
The ordering of the glossary by functional categories is intentional

XForms CR - 3.2.1 Illegal Requirement?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0006.html
The term "include" does not mean "add"; this is a host language issue
For future compatibility, every XForms element must be capable of holding an
ID

XForms CR - 3.2.3/3.2.4 Redundant/Ambiguous model attribute description
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0009.html
The "model" attribute is correctly part of both single and node-set binding
it does not bind to a <model> element, rather it specifies in which model
the binding occurs

XForms CR - 3.3 id attribute
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0010.html
We believe the sentence "A host language must include an attribute of type
xsd:ID on each XForms element." sufficiently and clearly defines this.
We note that most of the examples in the specification show such host
attributes, and are actively working on showing this better.

XForms CR - 3.3.1etc "XPath Extension Functions"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0012.html
We do not formally define the term "XPath Extension Function"; we use it
descriptively

XForms CR - 3.3.2 "one and the same"?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0013.html
Instance data can also be initialized through the 'src' attribute, which can
refer to the containing document

XForms CR - 6.1.3/6.1.4 - Catch 22 Interaction?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0016.html
We believe the table at 6.1.4, which we added specifically to address this
interaction, sufficiently describes the behavior an implementation should
have

Non-standard use of XPath location paths in XForms 1.0
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0017.html
We believe that XForms 1.0, in combination with XPath 1.0, is well defined,
and that implementers won't have problems using off-the-shelf XPath
libraries.

XForms CR - 7.5 - Which data types in XForms functions?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0043.html
We believe that this portion of the specification is unambiguous

XForms CR - 7.3 Evaluation Context
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0046.html
We believe that "inherits", used descriptively, correctly describes the
overall functionality

XForms CR - 7.10.1 Another XPath 1.0 Conformance Question
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0052.html
The function instance() returns a node-set, which is explicitly permitted by
XPath 1.0

XForms CR - 7.10.1 - The argument to the instance() function
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0053.html
The sentence in question is necessary in order for the processing to be
well-defined in cases where an unexpected datatype is passed to the
instance() function

* XForms CR - E3 - structuring content of inputmode attribute
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0074.html
The meaning of "In inputmode attributes, script tokens should always be
listed before modifiers." is that authors SHOULD (in RFC 2119 terms) use a
specific ordering for the content of the attribute. There is no difference
in processing specified for XForms Processors.

* XForms CR - 8.1.3
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0075.html
We believe that your suggestion would be acceptable for a conforming visual
XForms Processor; no specification change is required.

* XForms CR - 8.1.5 <xforms:output> - the value attribute
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0079.html
Either a "ref or bind attribute" is required _on form controls that require
binding attributes_. Several form controls do not require binding
attributes.

* XForms CR - 8.1.8 <xforms:trigger> example
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0080.html
The example code in 8.1.8 intentionally demonstrates a minimal <trigger>
form control.

* XForms CR - What is "form data"?
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0081.html
The term "form data" does not have an official definition in XForms. It is
used accordingly in the text.

* XForms CR - 8.1 - Class selectors "expected"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2002Nov/0072.html
Based on numerous comments from implementers and form authors, we believe
this is the appropriate wording.

Sincerely,

Micah Dubinko, on behalf of the XForms Working Group
Received on Wednesday, 4 December 2002 01:47:33 GMT

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