W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Progress on Functions Module(s)

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 17:45:02 -0700
Message-Id: <E68FBC53-4466-496E-A9A9-EF1C0ADAA1E9@orbeon.com>
To: "public-forms (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>

John & all,

I think that the current() function needs to find a better home. It is  
really a core function for XForms, at the same level as the context()  

Note that in XSLT 2.0, current() is under "16.6 Miscellaneous  
Additional Functions" ;-)

Can we put current() and context() together, since they both have to  
do with the XPath evaluation context?


On Aug 11, 2008, at 5:05 PM, John Boyer wrote:

> With some exceptions, I've reorganized the functions module based on  
> the emails from Leigh and Erik:
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/specs/XForms1.2/modules/instance/xpathFunctions/index-all.html
> Assuming the division is satisfactory, I will proceed to make  
> separate specs.
> Here are the points of interest:
> 1) The is-card-number() function was placed under "Data Integrity"  
> as that seemed to be enough of a generic name to fit the function,  
> whereas the name "E-commerce functions" was so broad that I felt  
> like putting *all* our functions into that section.
> Another perhaps better place to put it is in the conditional  
> functions.  Is that a better place?  Any other ideas?
> 2) The math functions seemed a better place to put random() than  
> data integrity, even though random could be used with some of the  
> data integrity functions.
> How might we handle the ability to show some of these use cases via  
> examples?
> 3) The "Nodeset Functions" category seemed to be a catch-all for  
> functions we didn't know what else to do with.  However, both  
> current() and count-non-empty() can be used in "conditional"  
> scenarios, so I put them there.
> The count-non-empty() *could* also be used in math operations, but I  
> didn't want to end up with sum-non-empty, max-non-empty, min-non- 
> empty and avg-non-empty. This function is not really needed, except  
> possibly as authoring convenience or optimization, but it already  
> exists, so I just put it in a place where we didn't get roped into  
> adding half a dozen more functions.
> 4) Neither count-non-empty() nor boolean-from-string() had examples,  
> so I added them.  I notice that avg, min, and max also don't have  
> examples.  This appears to be left-over omissions from 1.0.
> Do we need them?
> Can someone send the invocations and expected results from the test  
> suite?
> Should I copy the examples to the 1.1 spec?
> 5) I added several more examples to seconds-from-dateTime() to  
> address recent misunderstandings expressed on the list.
> Does everyone agree with them?
> Can we add these to the test suite?
> 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

Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2008 00:45:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:31 UTC