W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > April 2006

RE: Reminder for send comments and issues

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 19:47:57 +0100
To: <www-forms@w3.org>
Message-ID: <016401c65ccf$494bae00$0e01a8c0@Jan>

Hi Leigh,

> So on the balance I'd say we don't need a no-arg version, 
> just because the defaulting rules would be confusing.
> But if you or someone else says it's useful and clear, that's 
> fine with me too.

Oops...sorry for causing confusion! That's not what I'm suggesting. I'll
retrace our steps.

My initial point (after your initial point...) was that your example was
just a special case of the more general problem that once you do something
to change the context you have no way to get back to a prior context. You
suggested getting round it in the specific example of repeats by having
available to you the node that is the current repeat item, but in my view it
would be more 'correct' (at least in the example as you wrote it) to be able
to know the context of the parent evaluation context.

This was mainly because there are many other situations where this problem
arises: the group example that I gave before; using itemsets; labels on
triggers; the @iterate attribute that David proposed, and so on.

So, my initial suggestion was to have a function that can get any level of
evaluation context. But after your comments I thought that actually, most
use cases seem to be covered by the ability to get the parent context, and a
very specifically named function like "parent-context()" might be better.
This would leave the context() function free to take an ID as a
parameter--and *only* an ID--in the way that you suggested.

However, as far as I can see, this function wouldn't help your use case,
since I'm still sure that you need to be able to go back up the hierarchy of
contexts. The context() function would only give you the evaluation context
for the element with that ID, which is effectively the context that the
repeat is 'in', not the context that the repeat 'provides'.



Mark Birbeck
x-port.net Ltd.

e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net
t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/
w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/

Download our XForms processor from
Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 18:48:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:36:17 UTC