Re: Do we need an XForms actions module if we switch to XML events 2?

John,

The rational of adopting XML events 2 instead of XML events 1 is that XML 
events 2 is XML events  AND the stuff we added to it in XForms 1.1 (plus 
some optional extra things). So aside the 'naming' issues of some of the 
elements/attributes (which I didn't know at the teleconference when we 
decided this) we can say that
 
    XML events 2 (+ delay attribute on dispatchEvent) == XForms Actions

Therefore If we resolve the naming issues and the delay attribute on 
dispatch I don't see a reason why we couldn't reuse the XML events 2 
module. Isn't the advantage of writing small modules that they can be 
adopted easily by other specs?


Regards,

Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development Manager
Inventive Designers
Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com



John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> 
Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org
08/12/2008 07:44 PM

To
Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
cc
"public-forms (new)" <public-forms@w3.org>
Subject
Re: Do we need an XForms actions module if we switch to XML events 2?







HI all, 

I recall seeing a resolution while I was away to go to XML Events 2 for 
XForms 1.2, but this reverses previous decisions we made about 
modularizing what we have and focusing on stream-lined syntax for web 
authors. 

It seems problematic to go up a major version number on a baseline 
technology while only going up a minor version number in our own language. 


As a result, I thought the actions module would have if, while, and 
event() in them. 

A version of that module could be created in which it inherits those 
capabilities from XML Events 2, but that should not prevent the actions 
module from having if, while and events() available, regardless of where 
it gets them from. 

It should be possible to use if, while and event() from XForms 1.1 in the 
XForms 1.2 module whether or not you adopt XML Events 2 or stick with the 
current XML Events.  Moreover, even if XForms 1.2 were defined as a 
consuming profile that did import XML Events 2, this would not change the 
point about the actions module, which we are presumably modularizing so 
that it can be used by consuming profiles other than XForms 1.2.  To 
encumber all consuming profiles with adopting XML Events 2 seems 
excessive, particularly since we have already defined all of this without 
using XML Events 2. 

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




From: 
Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com> 
To: 
"public-forms (new)" <public-forms@w3.org> 
Date: 
08/12/2008 10:27 AM 
Subject: 
Re: Do we need an XForms actions module if we switch to XML events 2?





Nick,

The event() function is already part of XML Events 2, at least as of 
the 16 February 2007 draft. [1]

-Erik

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-xml-events-20070216/

On Aug 12, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com 
wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> When doing my action item 'move Actions module for XForms 1.2 to XML 
> Events 2.'  I wasn't sure we need the XForms actions module anymore.
>
> XML events contains:
>
>   - the action element
>   - if and while attributes
>
> It also contains a dipatchEvent element what our dispatch element 
> does, excluding our delay attribute. Shouldn't we use the same 
> element as defined in XML events 2 (if we don't want to change our 
> element name, maybe we should contact the people from XML events 2, 
> and ask them to change it, our spec is already a Public REC). We 
> should also contact them asking to add the delay attribute that we 
> introduced in XForms 1.1.
>
> So the only missing bit is the event() function which we also could 
> add in one of the XPath functions modules.
>
> What does everybody think about this?
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick Van den Bleeken  -  Research & Development Manager
> Inventive Designers
> Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170
> Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171
> Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
> Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer:
> http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer
>
>
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
> -- 

--
Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise Done the Right Way
http://www.orbeon.com/





-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. 
-- 

Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer:   http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer =
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--