- From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@cardiff.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 14:50:13 -0700
- To: "'AndrewWatt2001@aol.com'" <AndrewWatt2001@aol.com>, www-forms@w3.org
Andrew, I would say that matters concerning conformance levels are good candidate to be shaped by implementation feedback. .micah -----Original Message----- From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 1:38 AM To: xforms@yahoogroups.com; www-forms@w3.org; www-forms-editor@w3.org Subject: 7.8.1 - property() function - conformance-level It seems to me that there may a design inadequacy in or related to 7.8.1. If I am interpreting it correctly the conformance-level property relates to the XForms processor. What mechanism is provided, here or elsewhere in the specification, to support/define the scenario where an XForms Basic processor is served an XForms Full document? It seems to me that it may be possible for an XForms Basic processor to be served an XForms document which it cannot process, for example a document which uses unsupported XPath 1.0 axes. Is that correct? In which case, what behaviour should the XForms Basic processor produce? Is there, in fact, any mechanism for an "XForms document" to signal which level of conformance it claims? If my concerns here are well-founded it seems to raise significant questions about the suitability of the current XForms draft as a cross-platform forms solution. Andrew Watt
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 17:50:24 UTC