- From: Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 15:29:22 -0700
- To: public-forms@w3.org, "public-xformsusers@w3.org" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
All, In response to this action item, I have written the spec text for the relevant() function: Text: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/XPath_Expressions_Module#The_relevant.28.29_Function Diff: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/index.php?title=XPath_Expressions_Module&diff=3821&oldid=3820 Since the text fo the required() and readonly() functions should be very similar, I wanted to solicit feedback on relevant() first. I have also updated the text of the valid() function to deal with XPath items in general: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/wiki/index.php?title=XPath_Expressions_Module&diff=3820&oldid=3804 I have the following open questions: 1. What should the default return values be when there are no selected items? Currently: valid() says true(), relevant() says false(). What makes sense? Or could we return an empty sequence in that case? 2. valid() and attributes <price type="bar">10.42</price> <bind ref="price" type="xs:decimal"/> <bind ref="price/@type" constraint=". = 'a' or . = 'b'"/> => valid(price) returns false() Are we happy with that? Should we allow another option to validate a node without recursion? We have that in our implementation. Feedback welcome, -Erik
Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 22:30:10 UTC