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

RE: Hopefully simple question wrt case

From: Flinton Adam <Adam.Flinton@cfh.nhs.uk>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 09:21:29 +0100
Message-ID: <595299DD7F30014BBCE48B93DCB6065204263CBB@EXCHAQ2.nhsia.nhs.uk>
To: "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>, <www-forms@w3.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-forms-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark Birbeck
> Sent: 07 June 2006 13:53
> To: www-forms@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Hopefully simple question wrt case
> Adam,
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but XForms 1 doesn't 
> support XPath 2, and the xf:case element doesn't have a 
> condition attribute.

Rats. Are there any plans to do this as it would appear that setting the
"editable status" of fields as a result of values carried in an
instance/model is a fairly common use case requiring a std way to
achieve it rather than a workround.

Another example we have is to allow only certain people to edit certain
fields where again we determine the user on the server (via an initial
logon etc) & then the instance/model provided has value field which
determines the user's role & thus how many/which fields he/she can edit.

> Ideally you should be able to do what you want simply via the 
> @readonly MIP in combination with CSS. However, it will 
> depend on which processor you are using as to how close you 
> will get to your ideal in terms of the actual appearance.

A) I'm using Chiba on the server (in combination with JSF to deliver
B) Could you explain this in slightly more detail?

> For example, with formsPlayer, when an input is readonly you 
> can still edit the contents of the control, but the change 
> won't be committed when you navigate away from the 
> control--which is at least the correct behaviour, even if it 
> doesn't look great. (Basically, it's because readonly is 
> processed in the model not the view, but it's on our list of 
> things to improve :)
> Other processors may completely lock down the control when 
> it's readonly, in which case it will 'feel' more like an 
> xf:output. So if you can use the :readonly pseudo-class to 
> style the control so that it doesn't look like an xf:input, 
> then you've got pretty much what you want (without having to 
> use lots of switches and cases).

Thanks. I'll have a dig.


This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please accept our apologies; please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please inform us that this message has gone astray before deleting it. Thank you for your co-operation.
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2006 08:21:45 UTC

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