- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:00:57 -0400
- To: Forms WG (new) <public-forms@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OF884541C7.B9DDE348-ON88257360.005C9E65-88257360.005D7DC6@ca.ibm.com>
Apologies for essentially sending this again, but 1) it seemed a good idea to reiterate that the best approach (the one I think we should take) is to quickly update the XForms 1.0 schema with the new attributes and the few new child elements added in 1.1. There are a few reasons for this. First, it looks like a task that a few people could do in a few hours each. Compare with the fact that we have not had the upgrade to the modularized version in something like six or seven months now. Second, I believe there is some concern about whether the modularized schemas will work in (virtually) all tools due to use of advanced features. I'd rather have a schema that is more easily understood and more likely to be successfully processed. If someone wants to spend more time writing a better schema, that would be OK, but I'd prefer that it not hold up the process and that we have a bit more time to reality check the result against more tools. Meanwhile, having any schema that positions the new vocabulary into the current vocabulary is enough to answer the last call issue. 2) It seems the XForms 1.0 schema file I attached previous was co-mingled with the early 'modularized' files in some email packages. So this email contains the baseline XForms 1.0 schema file as an attachment (in the original message below), and there are no other attachments. 3) The attached file *is* the same one linked from the XForms 1.0 spec, so the link to the attached file is here: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2002/XForms-Schema.xsd Thanks again, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: 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 ----- Forwarded by John Boyer/CanWest/IBM on 09/24/2007 09:51 AM ----- John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 09/20/2007 05:39 PM To John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA cc "Klotz, Leigh" <Leigh.Klotz@xerox.com>, Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com, Forms WG (new) <public-forms@w3.org>, public-forms-request@w3.org, Charles F Wiecha <wiecha@us.ibm.com> Subject Postscript, Re: ACTION NEEDED (Charlie, Nick, Leigh): XForms 1.1 schema update Also, frankly I think it would be OK if you guys decided that the modularized schema stuff was just too complicated to work with right now. Instead, if you want to work from the XForms 1.0 schema, that might be quite a bit better (e.g. it has the version list definition needed for the model already). Given that the modularized version has *not* been carried through to completion, I think it is better to have a 1.1 schema quickly and modularize later than to continue to have a thing called XForms 1.1 schema but which is not at all reflective of XForms 1.1, no matter how much more modularized its 1.0 description is. Again, we can modularize later if anyone decides to take the time to do that. In case you guys decide to go this route, here is the file for you to work with: If it were me, this is the one I'd go with, for the reasons above. Thanks again, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. STSM: 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
Attachments
- application/octet-stream attachment: XForms-Schema.xsd
Received on Monday, 24 September 2007 17:01:14 UTC