W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xformsusers@w3.org > November 2016

Re: Lazy authoring

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 08:36:54 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAc0PEUEQo_hpFgnLrEwkhSN_t9-4=eut2a7_ktwL9FgF3Bb=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: Nick Van den Bleeken <Nick.Van.den.Bleeken@inventivegroup.com>, "public-xformsusers@w3.org" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
And does XSLTForms implement it / plan to implement it? -Erik

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:23:15 +0100, Nick Van den Bleeken <
> Nick.Van.den.Bleeken@inventivegroup.com> wrote:
>
> Doesn't lazy authoring make the onboarding of new people easier? As your
> first form will probably be easy, and lazy authoring will work for that
> kind of scenarios.
>
>
> Well, that was the argument. The question is, does anybody ever use it? If
> the answer is yes, then fine.
>
> Steven
>
> Surely it falls short for the typical xforms form. And surely for the type
> of forms that make xforms shine. But I would personally leave it to make
> the creation of your first form a bit easier.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick
>
> On Nov 23, 2016 3:43 PM, Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com> wrote:
>
> 1. Proposal: We deprecate lazy authoring.
>
>
> I don't have a problem with that. We never implemented it, not that it
> would be hard, but forms quickly go beyond what lazy authoring allows in
> its current state.
>
> 2.
>
>
>
>   <model/>
>   model id="m"/>
>
>   <input ref="a" label="a"/>
>   <input ref="b" label="b"/>
>   <input ref="a" model="m" label="ma"/>
>   <input ref="b" model="m" label="mb"/>
>
> So I think that "for the same instance" is missing from the first case.
>
>
> Agree?
>
>
> I am not sure I understand but, but in the example above, lazy authoring
> would kick in.
>
> -Erik
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2016 16:37:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 24 November 2016 16:37:48 UTC