John Boyer, IBM (chair)
Nick van den Bleeken, Inventive Designers
Leigh Klotz, Xerox (minutes)
Uli Lissé, DreamLabs
Steven Pemberton, CWI/W3C
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2009Mar/0018.html
John Boyer: The discussion topic
appears to be rebranding XHTML2 and XForms as "design languages"
and leaving HTML5 as a "browser language."
Steven Pemberton: When the AC voted on
the XHTML2 and HTML5 charters, both charters said they would be
dealing with XHTML1-family. That was pointed out after the vote, I
think by IBM but I'm not sure. They agreed to change it and take it
out of the HTML5 charter, but the change got made after the start
date of the charter. Someone complained recently and the edit was
reverted. So we now have two charters that say they're responsible
for the same thing.
John Boyer: What's the goal?
Steven Pemberton: The design as with
XForms is to allow a wide spectrum of implementations, server-side,
client-side, and in between. So they're saying we should focus on
server side.
John Boyer: Sebastian has already
commented. ODF also includes the XForms model. Surely that's a
client-side interactive document. It shows it works with things
outside XHTML. It's also the case that it's more efficient to
deliver the XForms to the client side. That's the goal of the
Ubiquity project as well, to provide something on the client. For
Accessibility, we focus on declarative behaviors, as that's easier
for other programs to figure out what's going on.
John Boyer: It's harder to figure out
what's going on with these JavaScript things together than
declarative languages.
Steven Pemberton: When I used Slidey
with Ubiquity, Slidey took all the input characters.
John Boyer: I've mentioned this to our
AC rep; others should respond as well. Leigh? Nick?
John Boyer: I think you should spend
some time formulating the response.
Leigh Klotz: I haven't seen the AC
list.
Steven Pemberton: You can read the
member archives.
John Boyer: I can send a link. Or if
someone else has it handy.
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/survey2009/results is there and member only but has no contents.
John Boyer: A further informative link from Philippe Le Hégaret: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-forum/2009JanMar/0177.html http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/survey2009/
John Boyer: Sam Ruby will be at the
AC meeting from IBM.
Steven Pemberton: I saw he received a
job offer from Microsoft, on his blog.
Leigh Klotz: There are rumors
Microsoft will be moving to either WebKit or a research project
they have with a sandbox browser.
Steven Pemberton: I found a library
that turns IE5 and above into into IE7 compatible. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/survey2009/
Nick van: this is a cool library; used
it quite some times.
John Boyer: Sam said there was some interest in Henry Sivonen's validator and adding XForms for HTML to it.
Action 2009-03-11.1: Leigh Klotz to provide RNG/RNC for XForms for HTML for Sam Ruby for Henry Sivonen's validator.
Steven Pemberton: We discussed the
clashes between XML Events 2 and XForms 1.1. I still have to
investigate. I'm convinved there's much of a problem.
John Boyer: It was more or less a noop
for us to move to XML Events 2.
Nick van: There were one or two
attributes named differently.
Action 2009-03-11.2: Nick van den Bleeken to look up issues for XML Events 2 and XForms 1.1 and respond to Steven Pemberton.
Steven Pemberton: And there was the
resource attribute; we wish we'd done the thinking for RDFa. It's
an attribute we introduced in XForms as a consistency with the
child element; it's functionality is the same as src, if I'm not
mistaken.
John Boyer: Same a @action
Steven Pemberton: So one option would
be for us in XForms 1.1 to XHTML 2 to say that you have to use
action, not resource.
John Boyer: What is the meaning of the
resource attribute from RDF?
Steven Pemberton: RDFa. It specifies
the object of a relation. It's similar to href but it's not the
intention that it's clickable. It specifies a URI that's part of a
relationship.
Leigh Klotz: Didn't Mark say that
resource was what the submission was about anyway? Or are you
saying that since @resource is what makes it "clickable" it's not
OK?
Steven Pemberton: I see. I thnk it's
ok to use @resource then.
John Boyer: We also have it on the
load action. It's not exactly UI clickable but it's like
submission; you click something that invokes it. For instance you
might say it's implicitly clicked.
Steven Pemberton: Since they both have
the same datatype, the problems are much less. That takes us to
encoding. If we accept the same datatype then similar arguments can
be used. In our case, it's a list of character encodings, such as
UTF-8. I think in XForms 1.1 it's just a single character encoding,
as it can be used for content negotiation.
John Boyer: Ours does like XSLT.
Steven Pemberton: But we can say in
this case it has to be a single one and we're done.
John Boyer: So in prose we say it's a
single one?
Steven Pemberton: Every element gets a
single one.
Leigh Klotz: So we put the string
restriction in our Schema and restrict the list length to one, or
just put in the base type?
Steven Pemberton: The details can be
worked out depending on whether it's done by hand or by
modularization.
John Boyer: What is encoding?
Steven Pemberton: It's the encoding
for the href, as href can be on everything.
John Boyer: Ours is for the coding to
be sent, not the encodign of the thing at the other end of the
resource.
Steven Pemberton: That's OK. As long
as the type is the same you can say that's what it does.
John Boyer: But we're destroying your
ability to do conneg on submission.
Steven Pemberton: There's no @href on
submission so there's no need for it anyway. It doesn't do anything
anyway.
John Boyer: So it's really just the
datatype fixup.
Steven Pemberton: Yes.
John Boyer: So if you have a specific
list, is it exhaustive?
Steven Pemberton: You've seen the
message from Markus.
John Boyer: What type do they use? We
used CDATA so how do we list the encodings?
Leigh Klotz: I suspect they just
excluded whitespace so they could have a list.
John Boyer: What type did they
use?
Steven Pemberton: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/abstraction.html#dt_Encodings
John Boyer: I'll look at ours.
Leigh Klotz: It's not an XML Schema
list; it's comma-separated and is exactly RFC2616.
Leigh Klotz: I suppose we could
change our encoding to be a list. Then we submit using the first
encoding that works.
John Boyer: So for XForms 1.1 or
XForms 1.2?
Leigh Klotz: For 1.1 you could say in
prose it's the first, but for 1.2 you could say you can use the
list.
John Boyer: For XForms 1.1 we say we
use XSLT's encoding. I think the XSLT encoding attribute says it's
an indication of the encoding.
Leigh Klotz: It's encoding for
output.
John Boyer: Can someone firm this
up?
Steven Pemberton: Let's summarize with
Markus first.
John Boyer: If someone put
encoding=UTF-8 today it would conform. You want to know if someone
says UTF-8, UTF-16. We'd probably just pick UTF-8, but if someone
put something odd...
Steven Pemberton: http://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets
John Boyer: Who should do this?
Action 2009-03-11.3: Steven Pemberton to coordinate with Markus Gylling on XHTML2+XForms attribute clashes.
Steven Pemberton: I think it's
broader; I don't think you have to panic. Currently it's rather
vague. We'll just tighten it up a bit. I don't think we have to
make changes.
John Boyer: So we can adopt the
tightened language in XForms 1.2?
Steven Pemberton: Yes.
John Boyer: Good deal.
Nick van: [irc]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0029.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2008Sep/0029.html
didn't we talk about this also on a f2f meeting, can't remember
which f2f
Steven Pemberton: Thanks for
completing your action item so quickly!
John Boyer: We need a meaning for
@target on submission/@replace=all. On
@replace=instance it's an expression. He's pointing
out the href target.
Steven Pemberton: In XML Events 2
dispatch target is now target-id.
John Boyer: That's probably one of the
conflicts in XForms 1.1.
Steven Pemberton: I don't think you
can tell a URI from an XPath expression by data restriction
anyway.
John Boyer: You can tell from the
base.
Steven Pemberton: It's a little odd to
say you have to determine based on other attributes. What if it
changes dynamically?
Leigh Klotz: Then it changes. It's a
co-occurrence constraint.
John Boyer: It's interpreted at the
time it's needed.
Leigh Klotz: It's clearly not
statically analyzable then, but a lot fo the rest of the stuff
isn't either.
John Boyer: Then maybe it's just a
string. I think it needs more thought.