Re: ACTION-2170: Suggest spec change for class on repeat.

• From: Philip Fennell <Philip.Fennell@marklogic.com>
• Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:32:01 +0000
• To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, "public-xformsusers@w3.org" <public-xformsusers@w3.org>, XForms Users Community Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <BE4808DA-335D-48AD-B787-EA13BD1B053D@marklogic.com>

Yes, that works for me.


On 08/05/2018, 13:20, "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:

    With
     <repeat class="foo" ref="list">
         <output ref="."/><h:br/>
     </repeat>
    
    this could be interpreted either to mean
    
     <group class="foo">
       <output ref="list[1]"/><h:br/>
       <output ref="list[2]"/><h:br/>
       <output ref="list[3]"/><h:br/>
     </group>
    
    or
     <group class="foo">
       <output ref="list[1]"/><h:br/>
     </group>
     <group class="foo">
       <output ref="list[2]"/><h:br/>
     </group>
     <group class="foo">
       <output ref="list[3]"/><h:br/>
     </group>
    
    
    While we don't formally define which of the two it is, I see that we have  
    one example in the spec [1]:
    
     .list ::repeat-item {display: inline}
    
     <repeat class="list" ref="1 to 10">
       <output ref="."/>
     </repeat>
    
    which uses the first interpretation.
    
    So, are we happy with making the first interpretation official?
    
    Steven
    
    
    [1]  
    https://www.w3.org/community/xformsusers/wiki/XForms_2.0#Interaction_and_rendering

    
    On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 15:33:25 +0200, XForms Users Community Group Issue  
    Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
    
    > ACTION-2170: Suggest spec change for class on repeat.
    >
    > https://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/xforms/actions/2170

    >
    > Assigned to: Steven Pemberton
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    
    

Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2018 08:32:31 UTC