- From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 14:49:45 -0800
- To: "'John J. Barton'" <John_Barton@hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: "'www-forms@w3.org'" <www-forms@w3.org>
I'm not following you, particularly w.r.t. <group> below... How about an example? Here's what the markup for the 8.3 example might look like: (namespace prefixes skipped for clarity) <xform id="first"> <model href="orderform.xsd"/> </xform> <xform id="second"> <model href="orderform.xsd"/> </xform> ... <textbox xform="first" ref="orderForm/shipTo/firstName"/> and elsewhere, the file orderform.xsd contains... <element name="orderForm" type="OrderFormType"/> <element name="shipTo" type="ShipToType"/> <element name="firstName" type="string/> <complexType name="OrderFormType" ... /> <complexType name="ShipToType" ... /> ... This represents our approach as of the Feb WD. In the absence of an 'xform' attribute, the context node is based on the first <xform> element in document order. Note that we may be binding to the instance data OR the Model/Schema depending on the context. Is this helpful? .micah P.S. The 'id' attributes on <model> and <instance> aren't used for binding, they're just there... -----Original Message----- From: John J. Barton [mailto:John_Barton@hpl.hp.com] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 10:55 AM To: Micah Dubinko Cc: www-forms@w3.org Subject: RE: Outer group vs named form At 04:52 PM 2/21/2001 -0800, Micah Dubinko wrote: >A common use case will be when <orderForm> is an XML Schema that exists in a >3rd party Web space. XForms works with this by including that schema by >reference. A 'name' attribute wouldn't work -- the independent schema would >have to be for the <shipTo> fragment, which seems less likely. (Does this >make sense?) Nope, since in that case the <group> is not needed, the Schema is provided. If a schema is referenced for the model do we have any elements inside the form? I guess the real issue is addressing and naming of the address anchors. Given a page with two forms, both of which are orderForm-s, how do we reference the instance values? It seems to me that in ref= a.b.c (or a/b/c as the submission format seems to use) the "a" has to point to the outermost layer, at the model. We need plants.orderForm.address and animals.orderForm.address where plants and animals are the two headers we assign in our header to contain the two schema references to order forms. Maybe I just don't have the logic quite yet. I suppose that in every ref we have a context. Where ever we have ref we are in a form? So orderForm.address gets context from being in the form that references the "plants" model? Similarly the submission gets its context this way? Why does model use "id" and other model elements use "name"? >We are looking for additional use cases. > >Thanks! > >.micah >(co-editor) > >-----Original Message----- >From: John J. Barton [mailto:John_Barton@hpl.hp.com] >Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 1:14 PM >To: www-forms@w3.org >Subject: Outer group vs named form > > >The example in 8.3 Direct Binding is > ><orderForm> > <shipTo> > <firstName>value</firstName> > </shipTo> ></orderForm> > >Here the "orderForm" is a group that seems to >exist only to give a name to the instance. >Why doesn't the model element have a "name" >attribute for this purpose? > >John. ______________________________________________________ John J. Barton email: John_Barton@hpl.hp.com http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/John_Barton/index.htm MS 1U-17 Hewlett-Packard Labs 1501 Page Mill Road phone: (650)-236-2888 Palo Alto CA 94304-1126 FAX: (650)-857-5100
Received on Thursday, 22 February 2001 17:52:55 UTC