- From: Ray Cromwell <ray.cromwell@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:43:19 -0800
- To: <www-forms-editor@w3.org>
- Cc: <ray.cromwell@oracle.com>
- Message-ID: <001801c1b501$5cecebb0$e6ae1990@rcromwell>
As agreed to at the last WG telecon, Add to section 4.3 "Interaction Events", the following events xforms:relevant xforms:irrelevant xforms:required xforms:notrequired xforms:readonly xforms:notreadonly Comments are in [] by me (Ray) [Issue: are these the right names? Or should they be something like xforms:relevantChanged] [Issue: do we need notification events for minOccurs/maxOccurs? To be complete, we should, but what should be call them?] These events are dispatched only when there is a change to the underlying model-item-constraint. All events are similar to xforms:valid Target: form control [Comment: because form controls are what are effected by the change] Bubbles: yes [Comment: because someone might wish to write a global event handler] Cancelable: no [Comment: not sure why xforms:valid says it is not cancelable] Context Info: none Default Processing: none, notification event only [Comment: if CSS WG adopts pseudo-classes for these UI states, and if the CSS DOM had fields to specify where something was relevent, required, etc then in the future, the default processing might say something like "set the pseudo-class field X to true/false" to reflect the event into the underlying UI state. For now, there is no default processing and it is assumed that UI control state updated by an implementation specific mechanism]] [Issue: Should we clarify the xforms:recalculate and xforms:refresh sections of the spec to say that recalculate updates dirty bits on model item properties and xforms:refresh picks these up and issues the appropriate notification events? Or should we say they are issued directly from the recalculate handler? Or, should we just leave it up to the implementation the exact sequence in which the events are generated?] -Ray
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 21:45:06 UTC