- From: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 15:08:49 +0100
- To: "Steven Pemberton" <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>, "Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org>, "public-xformsusers@w3.org" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>, "Alain Couthures" <alain.couthures@agencexml.com>
On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 21:18:40 +0100, Alain Couthures <alain.couthures@agencexml.com> wrote: > URL arguments should not be considered as an instance: no model? > read-only?... I meant an instance initialised with the values of the arguments. > A function such as "argument('name')" is effectively easy to implement > with Javascript in XSLTForms. > > It requires authors to know argument names in advance and doesn't allow > them to get the list of names of effectively present arguments. Maybe > "arguments()/name" or "location()/arguments/name" could also be > considered. Personally I'm not too worried about that. > Actually, any browser property accessible in "navigator" or "window" > objects can be useful... > > What do you think? I think we should spec it! :-) Steven > Alain Couthures > > Le 19/03/2014 16:12, Steven Pemberton a écrit : >> I have a need to access the arguments given to a the URL that causes an >> XForm to load. >> >> http://www.example.com/form.xml?type=1&name=foo >> >> One option would be a pseudo-instance: >> >> <setvalue ref="bar" value="instance('arguments')/name)" /> >> >> but I imagine it would be easier to implement a function: >> >> <setvalue ref="bar" value="argument('name')" /> >> >> Any opinions? >> >> Steven Pemberton
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2014 14:09:28 UTC