- From: Klotz, Leigh <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:04:12 -0700
- To: <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, <public-forms@w3.org>
- Cc: <www-forms-editor@w3.org>
If this turns out not to be possible, our fallback which we discussed in the meeting was simply to remove the property from the event. Leigh. -----Original Message----- From: public-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:public-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Erik Bruchez Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 9:09 AM To: public-forms@w3.org Cc: www-forms-editor@w3.org Subject: Question / comment about f2f resolution Resolution 2007-06-15.13 All, (Not sure if I can point to this resolution anywhere online yet.) This regards this issue: http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xforms-issues/Events?id=18 The resolution in the minutes says: "we accept with modifications; instead of the half-detached behavior we propose a parallel event context value listing parents of deleted nodes, with positional correspondence." John hasn't yet propose the text, but I am wondering what "positional correspondence" means. Assume you delete three elements children of a same parent. If the plan is for this context property to return a node-set, then I wanted to point out that it can't contain duplicates as per XPath 1.0 [1]: "node-set (an unordered collection of nodes without duplicates)" It can only return the parent node a single time, in which case there would be no "positional correspondence". (With XPath 2.0, you could return a sequence, which can contain duplicates.) If what I am describing above is the way this property was imagined, then another solution will have to be found. -Erik [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath#section-Introduction -- Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 18:05:25 UTC