Charlie Wiecha, IBM
John Boyer, IBM (chair)
Leigh Klotz, Xerox (minutes)
Steven Pemberton, CWI/W3C
Nick van den Bleeken, Inventive Designers
Erik Bruchez, Orbeon
John Boyer: We need details for the
Xerox-hosted part.
Leigh Klotz: OK.
John Boyer: Do we work on XForms
1.2 FPWD prior to rechartering, or spend time on future
features?
Nick van: Will we meet with other
groups as well?
John Boyer: We don't have any requests
at the moment.
Erik Bruchez: We should maximize
activities that don't work on the phone, exchange of ideas.
Nick van: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/CategoryXForms12
John Boyer: We need concentrated
effort to finish custom XPath functions, dialogs, external model
though it's not in the list.
Erik Bruchez: Do you mean write
spec-ready text there?
John Boyer: Yes.
Erik Bruchez: But I think it's better
to do the individual work offline.
John Boyer: But we're not making
progress offline.
John Boyer: We do need to do the
rechartering work, and we should have our documents ready. We have
done the work, but need to pull it together.
John Boyer: For example, for Custom
XPath Functions, we have a lot of stuff written as Erik knows. We
need a couple of hours of talk to nail it down. Then someone can do
teh writign part.
John Boyer: For dialog, we need to
pore through the details together and decide what to leave in, what
to leave out.
Erik Bruchez: It's just the first
draft.
John Boyer: Yes, and then we produce a
thin-spec.
John Boyer: We have a number of
discussiont like that to finish. I'd guess a lot of the time is on
the wording for concepts we already have, and then going on to
something else.
Erik Bruchez: What is the timeline for
rechartering?
John Boyer: I'd hope that the majority
of the work would be done and the rest in action items.
John Boyer: Anyone have a stronger
preference for talking about future things and less about
1.2?
Steven Pemberton: Those are both
future.
Resolution 2009-10-14.1: We will focus on XForms 1.2 issues at the upcoming F2F.
Nick van: There are no links to our
WG on the various group pages.
Charlie Wiecha: It's in XML
Technology, under components.
Nick van: It doesn't mention forms on
the XML Standards page so you have to geuss.
Charlie Wiecha: I think we're on a par
with other standards.
Leigh Klotz: Listing xforms under
components is a good move I think.
Nick van: We should be listed on the
related pages for other groups.
Charlie Wiecha: Yes, multiple
cross-references are needed.
John Boyer: Why aren't we under Web
Design and Applications? That's what people do with our
technology.
Leigh Klotz: There should be cross
references under Transformation, Processing, I18N...
John Boyer: Maybe we can work through
these.
Charlie Wiecha: These are supposed to
be thematic, so there will be cross references.
John Boyer: Do we need our own
listing under Web Design and Applications?
Charlie Wiecha: It's under HTML and
CSS.
Charlie Wiecha: I could see another
category for separation of concerns at the root of Web Design and
Applications.
John Boyer: It's hard to be a
Component and get a top-level entry. A11Y, I18N. HTML/CSS already
there.
Charlie Wiecha: Mobile Web.
John Boyer: And not scripting and
AJAX.
Charlie Wiecha: Multimodal gets their
own page. We should be listed there.
John Boyer: So these comments go to
Ian.
Action 2009-10-14.1: John Boyer to send message to Ian about Forms WG listing.
Nick van: http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath20/
gives me an integrated page.
John Boyer: I get a 404.
Nick van: Oh, now I do too.
Steven Pemberton: If you go to http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/ you see the new style sheet.
Steven Pemberton: There are a lot
of transition requests right now and they're overwhelmed.
John Boyer: Ours went in two weeks
ago.
Steven Pemberton: I asked yesterday
and I'll ask again.
Steven Pemberton: If you need me
during for the transition call during my absence, contact me
directly.
John Boyer: Testimonials are in.
Leigh, please re-send yours to the list.
Leigh Klotz: OK.
John Boyer: I don't think there is
anything new to do here. I contacted Doug Scheppers.
John Boyer: Doug said that there was a
web-browser maker agreement to implement DOM eventing as long as we
get rid of stuff, and they really don't want DOMFocusIn and
DOMFocusOut. Technical points are small side-issues. We're not
going to get anywhere.
John Boyer: In at least some
implementations, there will be a difference between the HTML
control that the he focus and the DOM element that has the focus.
So if you have xforms:input it might has the focus from the XForms
level, but there may be underlying HTML which has the focus as
well. I pointed this out to Doug, that we need a separate event
anyway in our own spec.
John Boyer: If no one has anything
else to say on this we'll drop it.
Steven Pemberton: I think we
commented on the XHR document normatively referencing HTML5 and I
believe he's changed that somewhat. We think he's now using the
HTML5 spec for certain definitions and will be commenting from
XHTML2 that there is no reason it should reference HTML5.
John Boyer: It should be the other way
around.
Leigh Klotz: So should we comment as
well that it's not uncoupled enough?
Steven Pemberton: We should look at
the spec in this WG.
John Boyer: Someone should look at
this, with with some tempo.
Leigh Klotz: I'll take a look.
Action 2009-10-14.2: Leigh Klotz to look at XHR today and provide draft comments: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2009Oct/0019.html
John Boyer: These could be XForms
1.1 errata. The relevant property ignores the
relevant=false property.
Leigh Klotz: "Depending on the
relative attribute of submissission."
Action 2009-10-14.3: Leigh Klotz to propose new wording for XForms 1.1 relevant property for http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2009Oct/0021.html
John Boyer: Part B, "This seem to
contradict the default value of the ref attribute of submission
being /"
Erik Bruchez: It would be the root
document node. It's contrary to our normal practice of picking the
root element.
John Boyer: For submission we want to
refer to items outside, such as PI. So the default of "/" is OK but
our wording is wrong.
John Boyer: So are implementors in
agreement that stuff outside the root element (PI etc) gets sent in
submission?
John Boyer: If there are no
objections, that needs fixing as well. I assume now's not the time
to adjust the spec?
Erik Bruchez: I think it's minor
enough that we don't need to fix it right now.
Action 2009-10-14.4: John Boyer to propose new wording for XForms 1.1 the xforms-submit for http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2009Oct/0021.html to enable the nodeset to bind to the root node.