- 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 14:09:27 UTC