Re: recalculation sequence algorithm

Hi John,

thanks for your long and complete answer.

> Back when I didn't know that the group wanted to bind to attributes in
> instance data, I thought that model item properties would be represented
> as attributes in the markup of the instance data such that the
> instanceNode pointer would've been enough without an extra type
> indicator.  I've since learned more about it (at the last FtF), but the
> spec hasn't been updated yet.

Does it mean that a new spec will arrive soon ?

> calculate="if(some condition happens, number(.)+1, number(.))"
>
> which increments the value of some node every time some condition
> happens.

I really don't like it (sorry): it looks like you're using the calculate
property to trigger an action. I'd personaly prefer an extension to the
setValue action to handle xpath expressions rather than that. See also my
mail of Fri, 5 Oct 2001 11:02:15 +0200 to the list about xforms events.

Another point : finding dependencies in XPath expressions not following
constraints 1, 2 and 4 of chapter 5.3.2 is a *lot* harder. Does xpath
expressions in model item properties have to follow them ? (a nice answer
would be "yes" :o) ) Is it the same in "basic" conformance level ?

thanks for your attention,

Jérôme

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2001 05:30:02 UTC