W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > September 2009

Question to Test Case 8.1.1.b

From: Lars Windauer <windauer@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:32:20 +0200
Message-ID: <22eee69a0909150232s5787b05u5d938fba8c423e23@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-forms@w3.org
Hi list,

I got a question regarding TestCase '8.1.1.b non-relevant form control
becoming relevant'

The test dispatches a setvalue action to /person-name/switch and as outcome
the instance node /person-name/first-name becomes relevant.
The test implies that the relevance change leads to an xforms-enabled,
xforms-value-changed, xforms-valid, xforms-readwrite, xforms-optional and an
xforms-in-range event dispatched to the xforms-input bound to
/person-name/first-name/name.

I do not understand why the xforms-value-changed, xforms-valid,
xforms-readwrite, xforms-optional and xforms-in-range event are dispatched.
Neither the relevant (6.1.4) nor the recalculate (4.3.2) section says
something about dispatching e.g. xforms-required events in response to
relevance changes.

Among other things "4.3.2 the xforms-recalculate event" says that only
changes(!) of required, readonly and / or relevant mips results in
dispatching the respective events. Unlike the xforms-value-changed event I
could not find any statement in the XForms 1.1 Recommendation saying that a
relevance change results in dispatching any other event than xforms-enabled
or xforms-disabled event.

Did I miss something within the recommendation or is the 8.1.1.b test
erroneous?


Best regards


Lars Windauer




-- 
Twitter: http://twitter.com/windauer
Skype:   windauer
Jabber: windauer@gmail.com
Received on Tuesday, 15 September 2009 09:32:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:17 GMT