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

Re: Lazy authoring

From: Alain Couthures <alain.couthures@agencexml.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 20:24:54 +0100
To: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, 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>
Message-ID: <52a612aa-5c41-8070-3747-997991239337@agencexml.com>
Yes, XSLTForms implements it and corresponding tests in Test Suite are 
with status Pass.

--Alain

Le 24/11/2016 à 17:36, Erik Bruchez a écrit :
> 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 <mailto:steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>> wrote:
>
>     On Thu, 24 Nov 2016 07:23:15 +0100, Nick Van den Bleeken
>     <Nick.Van.den.Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
>     <mailto: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
>         <mailto: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 19:25:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 24 November 2016 19:25:38 UTC