W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xformsusers@w3.org > February 2017

Re: Recalculation Sequence Algorithm

From: Philip Fennell <Philip.Fennell@marklogic.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 09:11:23 +0000
To: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
CC: XForms <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F470DDA3-0B3E-49CC-A6F8-C83F9B24BC9C@marklogic.com>
I’ve only made use of the dependency graph but I agree with Erik, ‘More details and examples might be better than less’.

Philip

From: <ebruchez@gmail.com> on behalf of Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Wednesday, 1 February 2017 at 06:26
To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Cc: XForms <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Recalculation Sequence Algorithm
Resent-From: <public-xformsusers@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Wednesday, 1 February 2017 at 06:27

I am a bit split on this. The dependency graph and recalculation algorithm is a difficult part of the spec. More details and examples might be better than less?

-Erik

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl<mailto:steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>> wrote:
https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XForms_2.0#Recalculation_Sequence_Algorithm


Does anybody feel the need to retain this section?

It is an informative example on how to do a recalculate.

Personally I feel that the conditions specified in the recalculate section are enough.

Steven

Received on Wednesday, 1 February 2017 09:11:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:37:47 UTC