W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > January 2001

RE: Review of XForms working draft

From: Michael Earls <michael@cerkit.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 21:21:43 -0700
Message-ID: <005801c0753c$b0d1c940$0300000a@cerkit.com>
To: <www-forms@w3.org>
> We might well feel that max-inclusive etc are "too cmplex"
> according to some as yet undefined complexity measure;
> however we are not making things simpler by adding quirks of
> our own that appear "simpler" to us --the rest of the world
>  will just remain confused.
>
We mere mortal business implementors do understand the notion of defaults
and we love shortcuts.  We aren't entirely retarded.  We're doing pretty
well adjusting to that complicated wrench that Microsoft threw at us when
they added the "style" attribute beside the already complicated "class"
attribute. Most of my developers have recovered but I still have a few who
get mixed up and avoid CSS altogether.  (I _am_ joking)

On a more serious note...

I want to take this chance to thank each of you for working so dilligiently
to define what I consider one of the most effective time-savers a business
web application developer will ever implement.  XForms are what I wish I had
had five years ago.

It will allow us to finally make a generic UI engine and focus on what we
are really here to do... our respective business domain programming.  I'm
getting tired of having to re-invent the UI for every new project.
Schema-based programming combined with XForms will certainly provide a rich
framework for our future development efforts.

Thanks again and keep up the good work!

Michael Earls

----- Original Message -----
From: "T. V. Raman" <tvraman@almaden.ibm.com>
To: "Micah Dubinko" <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Cc: <gilescope@yahoo.co.uk>; <www-forms@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 11:37 AM
Subject: RE: Review of XForms working draft


> On 1: I would strongly advocate against our continuing to
> cook up our abbreviated versions of max-inclusive and
> friends.
> I believed this at the FTF --the review comments only
> strengthen this belief.
>
> We might well feel that max-inclusive etc are "too cmplex"
> according to some as yet undefined complexity measure;
> however we are not making things simpler by adding quirks of
> our own that appear "simpler" to us --the rest of the world
>  will just remain confused.
>
>
> >>>>> "Micah" == Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com> writes:
>
>     Micah> Giles, Thanks for your time and feedback.
>
>     Micah> on 1) - I believe you are correct. Is this
>     Micah> confusing enough that we should consider just
>     Micah> leaving the inclusive/exclusive versions and skip
>     Micah> the abbreviated one alltogether?
>
>     Micah> on 2) - I like this idea. We will consider
>     Micah> something along these lines for our ongoing
>     Micah> research with the XForms Processing Model.
>
>     Micah> Thanks!
>
>     Micah> Micah Dubinko Co-editor, W3C XForms Working Group
>
>     Micah> -----Original Message----- From: Giles Cope
>     Micah> [mailto:gec@hyperoffice.com] Sent: Tuesday,
>     Micah> January 02, 2001 4:37 AM To: www-forms@w3.org
>     Micah> Subject: Review of XForms working draft
>
>
>     Micah> 1. 'max' for Number should be short for
>     Micah> maxInclusive not maxExclusive (and 'min'
>     Micah> respectivly).
>
>     Micah> 2. In 9.4: We do need a syntax to work on
>     Micah> multiple models but,
>
>     Micah> <xfm:textbox
>     Micah> ref="instance::b/orderForm/shipTo/firstName">
>
>     Micah>    but we loose the idea of the current context
>     Micah> using this syntax, and have to specify everything
>     Micah> from the root.
>
>     Micah>    We need something like:
>
>     Micah> <xfm:textbox
>     Micah> ref="instance::b./shipTo/firstName">
>
>     Micah>    but obviously with better syntax. Maybe we
>     Micah> could select the current context in the binding
>     Micah> element:
>
>     Micah> <xfm:bind> <xfm:select="orderForm/shipTo/">
>     Micah> <xfm:bind id="myfirstname" ref="firstName""/>
>     Micah> <xfm:bind id="myaddresszip" ref="address/zip"/>
>     Micah> </xfm:select> </xfm:bind>
>
>     Micah> my two cents, gilescope@yahoo.co.uk
>     Micah> ----------------------------------------------------------
>     Micah> "My sole reply," said he, "to that demand Is
>     Micah> action; when a fit request is made Silence and
>     Micah> deeds should follow out of hand."  -- Virgil
>     Micah> [Canto XXIV, 76]
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> --raman
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> IBM Research: Human Language Technologies
> Phone:        1 (408) 927 2608
> Fax:        1 (408) 927 3012
> Email:        tvraman@us.ibm.com
> WWW:      http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/raman
> PGP:          http://cs.cornell.edu/home/raman/raman.asc
> Snail:        IBM Almaden Research Center,
>               650 Harry Road
>               San Jose 95120
Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2001 23:30:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:21:48 GMT