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

RE: 7.8.1 - property() function - conformance-level

From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 14:50:13 -0700
Message-ID: <E840F0B7E6189547BDB91DA8BF2228AB28C701@csmail.cardiff.com>
To: "'AndrewWatt2001@aol.com'" <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>, www-forms@w3.org

Andrew,

I would say that matters concerning conformance levels are good candidate to
be shaped by implementation feedback.

.micah

-----Original Message-----
From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:38 AM
To: xforms@yahoogroups.com; www-forms@w3.org; www-forms-editor@w3.org
Subject: 7.8.1 - property() function - conformance-level



It seems to me that there may a design inadequacy in or related to 7.8.1.

If I am interpreting it correctly the conformance-level property relates to 
the XForms processor.

What mechanism is provided, here or elsewhere in the specification, to 
support/define the scenario where an XForms Basic processor is served an 
XForms Full document?

It seems to me that it may be possible for an XForms Basic processor to be 
served an XForms document which it cannot process, for example a document 
which uses unsupported XPath 1.0 axes. Is that correct?

In which case, what behaviour should the XForms Basic processor produce?

Is there, in fact, any mechanism for an "XForms document" to signal which 
level of conformance it claims?

If my concerns here are well-founded it seems to raise significant questions

about the suitability of the current XForms draft as a cross-platform forms 
solution.

Andrew Watt
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 17:50:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:21:52 GMT