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

Re: @number attribute on xforms:repeat

From: Allan Beaufour <beaufour@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:59:38 +0100
Message-ID: <90d6cb0e0511290859n1cc9f109j@mail.gmail.com>
To: Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org>
Cc: www-forms@w3.org

2005/11/28, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org>:
> I am ok with this being only a hint. I am also ok with different
> implementations providing different visual appearances - even though I
> think that it would make sense, in order to help spread adoption of
> XForms, to seriously discuss how XForms and (X)HTML interoperate, and to
> recommend visual apperances to implementors.


> The spec could also be clearer and tackle the issue that was raised by
> Allan, which is that if an implementation shows repeated items 1-10 as
> per the hint, and the setindex action selects index 14, the
> implementation SHOULD make sure that item 14 becomes visible to the user.

I missed that too in the spec. But as Raman pointed out, it's written
in 9.3.10: "The current item indicated by the repeat index should be
made available to the user at all times, for example, not allowed to
scroll out of view.". You have to search and draw the conclusion,
etc... but actually it's there.

[taking the scrolling part literally does not make sense to me though,
if the "view" is the entire form/page]

> So far I seem to have a confirmation that you can do whatever you please
> in your implementation, including using scrolling or paging of repeated
> items using @number as a hint, although I have yet to hear strong
> feedback in the line of "Yes, that makes sense, that's cool!" ;-)

Yes, that makes sense, that's cool!!


I might have some grudges against the attribute, but it is in XForms
1.0 and that's what we have to work with.

> Part of my initial questions remains though: how do current
> implementations of XForms + (X)HTML interpret the spec? Has everybody
> done like Allan and happily ignored this attribute?

Fair enough, it was a "smart and quick remark" :) I've ignored it for
now, as I haven't seen it as a high priority issue, and because of the
issues we are discussing here. If we can agree on a common
interpretation of how to do it for XForms+XHTML, I'm on,
spec-recommended behaviour or not.

... Allan
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2005 16:59:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:36:16 UTC