- From: Steven Pemberton <xforms-issues@mn.aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 09:24:22 -0500
- To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
- CC: www-forms-editor@w3.org
Thanks Mark. We accepted and made this change at the FtF 2007-06-13. Best wishes, Steven Pemberton > On the call yesterday, John suggested that one way to achieve the > use-case I would like (of allowing a submission that does not send any > instance data to not require validation) could be achieved by making > the @relevant and @validate attributes *default* to the value in > @serialize. I think this is a neat solution, and gives the author > flexibility. > > So, proposed wording to go section 11.1, would be: > > --- STARTS --- > > validate > > Optional boolean attribute that indicates whether or not the data > validation checks of the submission are performed. The default value > is the value of serialize, if present, or "true", otherwise. > > relevant > > Optional boolean attribute that indicates whether or not the > relevance pruning of the submission is performed. The default value is > the value of serialize, if present, or "true", otherwise. > > serialize > > Optional boolean attribute with default "true" that indicates > whether or not the instance data is serialized as part of the > submission. This can be useful for requests that either require no > data or that have the data already gathered in the URI. Note that that > setting serialize to false will also have the effect of preventing > relevance pruning and validation. The author is free to override this > by setting relevant and/or validate to "true". > > --- ENDS --- > > On 14/02/07, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net> wrote: >> The @serialize attribute seems to be a useful way of doing this: >> >> <xf:submission >> ref="/IHaveNoDataToSendIJustWantToUseSubmission" >> method="get" action="..." >> /> >> >> i.e.: >> >> <xf:submission >> serialize="false" >> method="get" action="..." >> /> >> >> However, because @serialize is not referred to until step 7 in 11.2, >> the processor will already have gone through relevance filtering and >> validity testing. Also, if there were no node to serialise from, step >> 2 would actually fail, despite the fact that the author actually >> doesn't want to serialise anything. >> >> Is it possible we can harmonise the two more, so that serialize can be >> used to indicate that you don't want to send any data, but you do want >> to use the whole submission infrastructure. This is particularly >> common when using a REST design, since a GET on a URL is all you need >> to do to get a resource. Likewise picking up RSS feeds. >> >> Perhaps a modification to step 2 along these lines is all that's needed: >> >> A node from the instance data is selected, based on attributes on >> the submission element. <add>If the value of serialize is false, >> processing continues at step 4, with no data selected.</add> If the >> attributes of submission select an empty nodeset... >> >> Regards, >> >> Mark >> >> >> -- >> Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer >> >> mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 >> http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com >> >> standards. innovation. >> > > > -- > Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer > > mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 > http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com > > standards. innovation. > >
Received on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 19:04:45 UTC