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

Re: send can violate bind/@constraint

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:47:36 -0700
Message-ID: <44DD1718.2070101@orbeon.com>
To: www-forms@w3.org

Leigh, Aaron:

I read the spec the same way, and unfortunately it is true that this 
behavior breaks the reasonable assumption that submission will only 
submit an instance that has passed validation AND the "required and not 
empty" rule (unless you use XForms 1.1's new @validate or @required 
attributes to disable those constraints).

I hope that this is an unintended consequence of the spec and that 
somehow we can fix it in an errata.


Aaron Reed wrote:
>> I recently encountered two different XForms processors that do this.
>> While I think the behavior is incorrect, it may be that it is emergent
>> from the events described in the spec.
>> Leigh.
> As I work on a processor that does not catch the constaint violation 
> that Leigh mentions, I can give you my interpretation of the spec.  In 
> xforms-recalculate 
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/index-all.html#evt-recalculate), it 
> mentions that this is where the model item property evaluations occur. I 
> see not other place in the spec that mentions MIP evaluation.  When 
> xforms-recalculate happens, we store the resulting node states in the 
> MDG.  This is what we reference when a submission request occurs.
> In Leigh's example, during the xf:action, a xf:setvalue happens. 
> However, all of our remembered constraint, relevancy, etc. nodestates 
> are for the previous node value until recalculate happens.  Since 
> recalculation is deferred in Leigh's example, this won't happen until 
> after the xf:send happens.
> I believe that we are working in accordance to the spec.  If we are not, 
> please let us know which MIP evaluations should happen that we are 
> missing and when they should happen.  I can kindof see in the spec where 
>  possibly relevancy and constraint should be evaluated during 
> submission, but that also doesn't make sense to me since I definitely 
> don't see where @calculate would be processed and constraint could 
> easily be dependent on the result from an @calculate which didn't run.
> Have a great weekend all,
> --Aaron

Orbeon - XForms Everywhere:
Received on Friday, 11 August 2006 23:47:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:36:18 UTC