W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > February 2007

Re: Readonly, relevant attributes for trigger

From: Aaron Reed <aaronr@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:40:04 -0600
To: www-forms@w3.org
Message-ID: <eqt4a8$7t7$1@sea.gmane.org>

Hi Erik,

Relevant and readonly attributes on xf:controls?  Really?  There might 
be some really good use cases that the W3C is looking at to consider 
this but my first reaction is, "ewwwww".  Relevancy and readonly-ness is 
the state of the instance node and the control is just reflecting that 
state.  Why would a control be relevant or readonly if it isn't bound to 
data?  I can see a form author wanting to make a button appear or 
disappear easily with an attribute since the button isn't bound to 
instance data, but they can already do this with CSS.  Or heck, they can 
use a native widget from the host language and use the attributes that 
that native widget already supports.  Nothing wrong with having a 
xhtml:button in a xhtml document or a xul:button in a xul document.  You 
can listen for a DOMActivate on a native widget just as easily as on a 
xf:control.

I guess that I just don't get the value of adding attributes like this 
to the XForms spec.  Can you give an example?

Thanks,
--Aaron

Erik Bruchez wrote:
> 
> Guntis Ozols wrote:
> 
>> In real life, for me it means that I have to create helper instance + 
>> helper
>> bindings (bloating, again), just to manage relevant/readonly for buttons,
>> because there is NO node in instance data with proper values for these
>> attributes. If that's the intention, could this be clarified in the spec.
>> Otherwise, attribute solution is  preferred.
> 
> While this won't be in XForms 1.1, the XForms Working Group has been 
> thinking about allowing model item properties directly on controls. As 
> you correctly point out, this can simplify the code, like with triggers 
> as you point out, but also in the spirit of smoothing the transition 
> from HTML forms to XForms and allowing developers to create a model only 
> when really necessary.
> 
> -Erik
> 
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 19:56:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:08 GMT