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

Re: xforms 1.1 xf:insert examples

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:53:29 +0200
Message-ID: <44C781E9.4000702@orbeon.com>
To: www-forms@w3.org


> I have no problem with the behavior as it is stated in the spec (now 
> that you've explained it to me).  I started this thread because the I 
> didn't like the behavior that was MY understanding of the spec.  But 
> that understanding was quite wrong :)

No problem at all, I could as well have been wrong ;-)

> So how would I change the spec so that no one is left with the 
> understanding that I had?  I would like the spec to have a section 
> describing the rules governing @nodeset, if nothing else.  In my case, I 
> wasn't looking at the text under @context very closely because I didn't 
> have a @context on my element.  I would think that a section that 
> contains any phrase that says, "if the nodeset is empty..." would have 
> that phrase/rule re-iterated under a section for @nodeset.

Difficult to say! This section does require going through at least a 
couple of times to get a real hold of it.

It would be ideal if XForms users could just read the spec and have an 
instant understanding of all the implications of a particular section, 
but unfortunately most specs are not really written in that spirit. The 
XForms spec is probably somewhere between two extremes. With that type 
of specs, tutorials, articles and books are usually required to make 
explicit those implications, provide extended examples, etc.

On the other hand, what matters first is that implementors can 
understand the spec in a non-ambiguous way so that they can implement 
the functionality as expected. As long as the spec does that (and I 
think 1.0 2nd ed and 1.1 are much closer to that ideal than the initial 
1.0), I will be reasonably happy.

> Man, this is a complicated section with a bunch of rules.  I hope that 
> there will be a lot of testsuite coverage here! ;)

Yup, that should help as well.

(Note BTW that my opinions in this thread in particular and in this list 
in general are my personal opinions, not necessarily the XForms Working 
Group's, unless explicitly stated).


Orbeon - XForms Everywhere:
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2006 14:53:42 UTC

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