- From: Karandikar, Shailesh <Shailesh.Karandikar@dendrite.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 10:54:46 -0500
- To: "'XForms@yahoogroups.com'" <XForms@yahoogroups.com>, "'www-forms@w3.org'" <www-forms@w3.org>
Hi, XForms requirements mention save and continue feature. I would like to distinguish between incomplete-forms from invalid-forms. Typically, 'Required' data would result in incomplete forms. It would be up to the author to decide whether to allow 'saving' of such forms. Incomplete forms are not 'submitted' but 'saved' to a local or remote persistence layer to be retrieved later; The exact mechanism depends on the underlying framework. Unless I've missed something obvious, I do not find this behavior clearly explained in the processing model. It would be useful to be able to 'declaratively' specify this behavior. XForms author should be able to specify and control following behaviors: 1. Validation modes supported by the form: delayed, incremental, relaxed, or validate-on-submit, etc. Although this would complicate the validation semantics and may result in inconsistent user interactions/interface, it would be the responsibility of the XForms author to ensure overall consistency. 2. Whether an xform instance is allowed save-n-continue feature. This would be a 'computed' property, based on certain conditions: E.g. User must enter name and birth-date before suspending a credit-card application. I.e., ability to impose validations on fragments when using save-n-continue feature. This expression could form a new model item property, to be applied depending on the validation modes supported by the forms. Regards, Shailesh Karandikar, Dendrite Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Mark Seaborne [mailto:MSeaborne@origoservices.com] Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 3:32 AM To: XForms@yahoogroups.com; www-forms@w3.org Subject: Submitting incomplete forms Hi I assume it is a fairly common requirement for someone filling in a form to be able to make regular saves, and maybe to be able to start editing on one machine, and finish on another machine at a later time. This suggests to me that the ability to submit incomplete instances, for appropriate processing, would be useful. Has anyone done any work like this with XForms? I haven't read the latest working draft as carefully as I would like, but it looks to me as though saving an incomplete form that is not valid against a referenced W3C XML Schema is not possible, unless the schema has been designed for this use (in which case the instance would be valid, of course). Given that many of us will have no control over the schemas used for validation, that may not be possible (I assume). I cannot see that I will fare much better using model items to validate. Iis there some way to make properties, such as required, conditional. If I have missed something, I would be grateful if someone could point me in the right direction. It seems to me that it would be useful for forms based applications if the author could define multiple states of validity, each with their appropriate actions, such as submit to X for processing, submit to Y for storage and later completion, submit to Z for some external validation processing, etc. If a user has incorrectly completed a form for some reason, one still might be interested in retaining the XML instance in order to see what they have done wrong, and to provide assistance maybe. Kind of thing that Schematron lets you do. I expect I am just missing something really obvious. If so I would be really grateful if someone could point me in the right direction. Otherwise, I guess it will be a matter of minimal validation within the XForm, and do most of the work at the server. Perhaps that is the safest route to go anyway. All the best Mark Seaborne Origo Services Ltd ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. **********************************************************************
Received on Monday, 4 November 2002 11:05:16 UTC