W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > December 2005

Re: xf:duplicate emulation

From: Alexander Anokhin <ava@vaz.ru>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:53:49 +0400
Message-ID: <439EB64D.90100@vaz.ru>
To: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
CC: www-forms@w3.org, www-forms-request@w3.org
John Boyer wrote:
> 
> In the next day or two, the new 1.1 working draft will appear.
> In it, you'll see that we've scrapped duplicate and destroy in favor of
> simple modifications of insert and delete that cover the functionality
> of duplicate and destroy.
> 
> The main problems for insert were how to identify a nodeset that
> could become empty and how to get a prototypical subtree from
> someplace else.
> 
> By simply adding the new attributes to insert rather than inventing a
> new action, we found we could achieve the desired results.  We also
> found that insert's separation of the target location into nodeset, at
> and position made it easier than was the case with duplicate to
> express the most common use case of inserting a new homogeneous
> collection item into a repeat after the currently indexed repeat item.  
> Also, an insert with a target of the root document element of the
> instance results in replacing the instance.
> 
> Details and examples to be published shortly.
> 

Thanks for quick reply, John.
Completly agree, but the problem is to achieve such functionality in 
XForms 1.0 only, since very few client-side processors implements 1.1 WD 
(afaik FormsPlayer only?). As i see for now it can't be done without 
using of Javascript to make FireFox XForms extension behave like in 1.1 WD.
Main problem of client-side XForms for me is poor portability. Sutuation 
seems like in HTML world while ago - we've one spec and many 
specialists, whose primary job is to make HTML-pages looks similar in 
different browsers. So articles like "How to make crossbrowser XForms" 
makes me worry for the future of this technology ;).

and sorry for casual english.

--
Alexander Anokhin
AVTOVAZ JSC
email: ava@vaz.ru
icq: 123275798

Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:54:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:02 GMT