W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > February 2008

Re: What to do with outer xf:bind with no @nodeset

From: Aaron Reed <aaronr@us.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2008 13:33:36 -0600
To: www-forms@w3.org
Message-ID: <fo7pfl$4m8$1@ger.gmane.org>

Fixing the spec is all I ask.  I have no problem with how it works.  But 
it is tough when a user has a question and I have to answer, "I used 
logic and the process of elimination to figure out your answer...trust 
me".  I'd much rather say, "look at the description for @nodeset in the 
bind element section."  The spec is all we got for XForms 1.1 until 
someone decides to write a book.  I think we have to make things as 
direct and human readable as possible if we want to encourage adoption.

--Aaron

John Boyer wrote:
> 
> Hi Aaron,
> 
> I did have a feeling you would point that out.  To be fair to your 
> point, I did take note of the fact that the spec did not come out and 
> say that the MIPs attach to the context node.  But in fairness to 
> everyone else who was satisfied with the current amount of specificity, 
> there isn't a terribly obvious alternative for where to attach the MIP 
> when the nodset is optional other than attaching the MIP to the context 
> node for the MIP expression, which is how it works when the nodeset is 
> required (granted because the context node is the same as the node 
> indicated by the nodeset).  Put another way, why should it  behave 
> differently and choose a different node because one says:
> 
> <bind nodeset="x">
>      <bind calculate="y"/>
> </bind>
> 
> rather than
> 
> <bind nodeset="x" calculate="y"/>
> 
> Still, we can put it on the list of edits for 1.1 going to PR.  Will 
> that suffice?
> 
> Thanks,
> John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
> Senior Technical Staff Member
> Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher
> Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
> Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
> IBM Victoria Software Lab
> E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com  
> 
> Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer
> Blog RSS feed: 
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Aaron Reed <aaronr@us.ibm.com>*
> Sent by: www-forms-request@w3.org
> 
> 02/01/2008 01:13 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	www-forms@w3.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	Re: What to do with outer xf:bind with no @nodeset
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, I had seen that section, which clearly defines what the evaluation
> context node should be for the expressions contained in the MIP
> attributes.  But I don't see it say anywhere that the MIP's are then
> applied to the evaluation context node.  Nor does it say that anywhere
> in the xf:bind section.
> 
> And to be what I'm sure is over critical, I don't think that a user
> should have to look in the evaluation context section and read through
> that whole section to know what node(s) the MIPs are being applied to.
> I would expect it to be spelled out in the bind section.  Something like,
> 
> nodeset
> 
>     An optional attribute containing a model binding expression that
> selects the set of nodes on which this bind operates.  If the nodeset
> attribute is not present, then the bind operates on the evaluation
> context nodes of the bind element.
> 
> Then, if the user doesn't know what the evaluation context nodes are,
> they can read further on that subject.
> 
> I might be nitpicking, but it certainly isn't clear to me where the
> MIP's are applied.
> 
> Also, could someone verify what should happen if my @nodeset points to a
> node with complex content?  For example, the root node that has 3 child
> elements underneath it?  Should the result of @calculate wipe out the
> child elements or should the result of @calculate be stored as the first
> child node (a child text node) of the bound node and leave the child
> elements alone?
> 
> --Aaron
> 
> John Boyer wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > The definition of the bind element appears here:
>  > http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#structure-bind-element
>  >
>  > It ends with the statement that the evaluation context for the MIP
>  > attributes is obtained here: http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/#expr-eval
>  >
>  > Wherein the following relevant paragraph appears:
>  >
>  > XPath expressions also appear in model item property attributes of the
>  > bind element to define computed expressions. If the bind element does
>  > not express a Node Set binding, then the in-scope evaluation context for
>  > model item property attributes of the bind is equal to the in-scope
>  > evaluation context for the bind. Otherwise, the bind has a Node Set
>  > binding, and computed expressions for each model item property attribute
>  > are generated for each node. For each computed expression generated, the
>  > evaluation context node, position and size are determined by the same
>  > method as dynamic in-scope evaluation context rule above, except the
>  > computed expression is used in lieu of a binding expression attribute
>  > such that the bind element is the nearest ancestor binding element.
>  >
>  > The reference to the expression evaluation section was added in Erratum
>  > E23: http://www.w3.org/2006/03/REC-xforms-20060314-errata.html#E23
>  >
>  > That erratum also notes that it is dependent on the wording added by
>  > erratum E17.3:
>  > http://www.w3.org/2006/03/REC-xforms-20060314-errata.html#E17c
>  >
>  > which is what included the above paragraph (see the diff-marked version
>  > 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/03/REC-xforms-20060314-errata-diff-20070719.html#E17c).. 
> 
>  >
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
>  > Senior Technical Staff Member
>  > Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher
>  > Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
>  > Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
>  > IBM Victoria Software Lab
>  > E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com  
>  >
>  > Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer
>  > Blog RSS feed:
>  > http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > *Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>*
>  > Sent by: www-forms-request@w3.org
>  >
>  > 01/31/2008 08:32 PM
>  >
>  >                  
>  > To
>  >                  www-forms@w3.org
>  > cc
>  >                  
>  > Subject
>  >                  Re: What to do with outer xf:bind with no @nodeset
>  >
>  >
>  >                  
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >  > Orbeon sandbox can't even load the form
>  >
>  > Yup we require the @nodeset attribute on xforms:bind. I had not  
>  > realized that the @nodeset attribute had become optional and I am  
>  > interested in the answer too!
>  >
>  > -Erik
>  >
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>  >  > <!-- basic FO page definition stuff -->
>  >  > <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
>  > xmlns:xforms="http://www.w3.org/2002/xforms
>  >  > "
>  >  > xmlns:ev="http://www.w3.org/2001/xml-events"
>  >  > xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
>  >  > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" >
>  >  >    <head>
>  >  >      <title>binding testcase</title>
>  >  >      <xforms:model>
>  >  >          <xforms:instance xmlns="">
>  >  >            <values>
>  >  >              <value>27</value>
>  >  >            </values>
>  >  >          </xforms:instance>
>  >  >          <xforms:bind id="binddata"
>  >  >                       calculate="now()"/>
>  >  >          <xforms:submission id="submitInfo"
>  >  >                             method="post"
>  >  >          action="http://www.xformstest.org/cgi-bin/echo.sh" />
>  >  >      </xforms:model>
>  >  >    </head>
>  >  >    <body>
>  >  >      <h2>I think that the submission should show the current date and
>  >  >          time along with the value node and its value.
>  >  >      </h2>
>  >  >      <h3>Uses now() and bind w/o nodeset attribute</h3><br/>
>  >  >      <xforms:submit submission="submitInfo">
>  >  >        <xforms:label>Echo instance data</xforms:label>
>  >  >      </xforms:submit>
>  >  >    </body>
>  >  > </html>
>  >  >
>  >  > Any help appreciated.  Thanks,
>  >  > --Aaron
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
>  > http://www.orbeon.com/
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 4 February 2008 21:33:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:11 GMT