- From: Tomayko, Ryan <Ryan_Tomayko@stercomm.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:07:31 -0500
- To: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com
- Cc: xforms@yahoogroups.com, www-forms@w3.org, John Boyer <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>
Also, I just had a chance to read Micah's responses on xml-dev [1] that I believe you were referring to here: > There are background uncertainties since Micah Dubinko's > recent post on XML-Dev is by no means clearly expressing > the same meaning as John Boyer's email. And after reading both John and Micah's comments, I have to disagree. I felt that Micah and John were talking about exactly the same thing. An XForms Processor maintains XForms instance data models of which there will be one per <xf:instance/> element. Also, I personally don't like the term "copy" (as in "copy documents") because if a URI is specified instead of an inline document, the term "copy document" becomes misleading. It might be easier to imagine this as their simply being separate instance documents for each <xf:instance> element and each of them may be initialized with either data from the source document (inline) or from an external location (uri). Another possibly misleading point might be the misconception that using <xf:instance/> element is equivalent to XIncluding an external resource into the source document. My interpretation is that this is not the case. The instance element simply tells the processor where to get initial data for a certain instance document, it does not modify the source document in any way. The reason I bring this up is that I can see where this might lead to the idea of "copies" of instance documents. i.e. The XForms Processor runs, expanding external instance documents into the source document and then makes "copies" of each instance document. I don't conceptualize it this way at all. I view it as there being multiple instance documents that are completely separate from the source document and they may be initialized with XML specified inline or located externally. - Ryan [1] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200211/msg00598.html -----Original Message----- From: John Boyer [mailto:JBoyer@PureEdge.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 2:27 PM To: Tomayko, Ryan; AndrewWatt2001@aol.com Cc: www-forms-editor@w3.org; xforms@yahoogroups.com; www-forms@w3.org Subject: RE: XForms CR - 7.10.1 Another XPath 1.0 Conformance Question An excellent exposition, Ryan. In essence, XPath functions supplied by the consuming application are free to access out of band data. For another example of a function that does something like this, see the here() function in the XML Signature recommendation. John Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Product Architect PureEdge Solutions Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Tomayko, Ryan [mailto:Ryan_Tomayko@stercomm.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 11:01 AM To: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com Cc: www-forms-editor@w3.org; xforms@yahoogroups.com; www-forms@w3.org Subject: RE: XForms CR - 7.10.1 Another XPath 1.0 Conformance Question Andrew, I am in no way the authority on this but I can give you one companies interpretation on how this should be implemented. There are possibly many separate documents, and/or xpath data models (I'm using the two interchangeably) that an XForms Processor maintains. Each <xf:instance/> element defines a separate xpath data model. i.e. When an XForms Processor comes across an xf:instance, it creates a new xpath data model and either a.) loads the xpath data model from the uri specified, or b.) loads the xpath data model from XML specified inline. Each data model is held separately and traversal from one data model into either the source document, or other instance xpath data models, is impossible with the base set of XPath axes and function library. For example, assume I have 3 instances (i1, i2, and i3). If I am evaluating the XPath expression ".." in i1, I do not get the <xf:instance/> element back as a result, I get an error because I'm reaching for a parent that doesn't exist. If I evaluate the XPath expression "/" in i3, I get back the root of i3, not the root of the source document. In other words, it is impossible to go outside of an individual instance data model. It is also impossible to access the source document unless it is explicitly loaded into an instance. (e.g. <xf:instance src="./this.xfm"/>). This is where the instance() function comes into play. It allows me to traverse into the root of some other instance's xpath data model, which would be absolutely impossible otherwise. So, the instance() is NOT the id() function, which seems to be how you've interpreted it.. The instance() function is not limited to resolution within the context xpath data model. How the instance() function locates the xpath data model is an implementation detail. For example, we use a HashMap to map instance id's to DOM Document objects. The Map may contain any number of instance id's to DOM Document mappings. When the instance() xpath function is called, the function simply looks up the document in the HashMap and returns it. Hope this helps, - Ryan -----Original Message----- From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 8:25 AM To: www-forms@w3.org; www-forms-editor@w3.org; xforms@yahoogroups.com Subject: XForms CR - 7.10.1 Another XPath 1.0 Conformance Question This question is, for a short time, posted only to the three XForms lists. I have other concerns about 7.10.1 which I will post separately. It seems to me that the XForms CR may be using the instance() function and its related location paths in a way inconsistent with XPath 1.0. I make the point in the assumption that John Boyer's recent email gives an accurate description of the relationship between instance data and the containing document. I am assuming that there is a *copy* of part/all of the content of an <xforms:instance> element in a separate XPath data model. There are background uncertainties since Micah Dubinko's recent post on XML-Dev is by no means clearly expressing the same meaning as John Boyer's email. Nor has the XForms WG responded to my question regarding the precise meaning of "instance data" and its scope. My concern relates to the following syntax in the CR: ref="instance('orderform')/shipTo/firstName" The instance() function seems to me to reference the id attribute containing the value "orderform". As I understand the situation that id attribute only exists in the original/containing document or, more precisely, in the XPath data model which represents it. As far as I understand it a representation of that <xforms:instance> and its id attribute do not exist in the *copy* XPath data model. Therefore the instance() function in the first location step of the quoted location path is referencing a node in the XPath data model of the original/containing document. However, again if I am understanding correctly, the two following location steps reference *the copy* XPath data model (not the XPath data model of the original/containing document). So we seem to have a single XPath 1.0 location path apparently operating on two separate XPath 1.0 data models. To the best of my knowledge that is inconsistent with XPath 1.0. Andrew Watt
Received on Monday, 18 November 2002 15:08:45 UTC