W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xformsusers@w3.org > March 2019

Re: ACTION-2234: Spec up changes to load.

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2019 18:09:53 +0100
To: "Erik Bruchez" <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Cc: XForms <public-xformsusers@w3.org>, "XForms Users Community Group Issue Tracker" <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.zypdyr2fsmjzpq@steven-xps>
At least you can catch the error and do something with it, even if it is  
just ignoring it.

Steven

On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 17:32:16 +0100, Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>  
wrote:

> I am fine with this. We could also choose the NOP option in case there  
> is no `resource` and the binding is the empty sequence. I assume you  
> prefer the error in this case. I >could go either way.
>
> -Erik
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 4:13 AM Steven Pemberton  
> <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:
>> So just to check we agree on what we are trying to achieve:
>>
>> <load ref="..." resource="..."/>
>>
>> The URI is obtained:
>>  - If there is a @resource, it is used.
>>  - Otherwise the binding is used.
>>
>> If the result is an empty sequence, an xforms-load-error is dispatched  
>> to the load element.
>>
>> Otherwise, the link indicated by the URI is traversed.
>>
>> If traversal is not possible or fails, then an xforms-load-error  
>> *should* be dispatched to the load element; however, it is recognized  
>> that there are circumstances where this is not possible, such as when  
>> the error is discovered after XForms processing has ended.
>>
>> =========
>>
>> (
>>  XForms 1.1 versions did nothing for error conditions, and also allowed  
>> <load/> with no attributes, which also did nothing
>>  https://www.w3.org/TR/xforms11/#action-load
>> )
>>
>> Steven
Received on Friday, 15 March 2019 17:10:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:37:51 UTC