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
XHTML
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.


Adam

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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:05 GMT