- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 09:30:23 -0700
- To: "Allan Beaufour" <beaufour@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Erik Bruchez" <erik@bruchez.org>, "Xforms W3C WG" <www-forms@w3.org>, www-forms-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFDD8C7FB3.F011AAE1-ON88257155.00599A99-88257155.005AAD66@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Allan and Eric, When the label has an empty nodeset, the string result of that is empty string. Non-relevance also typically gets styled as non-visible, so in both of those cases the label of the item would not be seen. Non-relevance could also be styled as disabled, but for a label to be disabled means that it is greyed out. But we don't have anywhere in which the label being non-relevant or empty affects the control for which it is a label. Non-relevance is applied based on a UI binding between the control and the model. We have direct language in the spec that says if you have no UI binding, then relevance does not apply. We also have special language that says that the implicit group within each iteration of an unrolled repeat acts as if it has a UI binding with respect to inheriting model relevance. We could *add* language that says that the relevance of each node of an itemset's nodeset is applied to the generated item, but that language doesn't exist now, and if it did, then we would have an inconsistency because there is no way currently to put a UI binding on the explicitly declared items. So, right now relevance does not get applied to items, regardless of how they are declared. John M. Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Product Architect/Research Scientist Co-Chair, W3C XForms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com http://www.ibm.com/software/ Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer "Allan Beaufour" <beaufour@gmail.com> Sent by: www-forms-request@w3.org 04/19/2006 01:36 AM To "Erik Bruchez" <erik@bruchez.org> cc "Xforms W3C WG" <www-forms@w3.org> Subject Re: xforms:item and xforms:itemset: label and value bound to non-existing nodes On 4/18/06, Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> wrote: > I am not sure that the spec is very explicit on this matter. Consider: > > <xforms:item> > <xforms:label ref="some-label"/> > <xforms:value ref="some-value"/> > </xforms:item> > > Now what if "some-label" doesn't point to a node? This is probably the > same as, say, an xforms:input label not pointing to a node. Does this > mean that the XForms engine handles: > > o The label as non-relevant? Yes, it is a form control, so it should be non-relevant then. > o The label as an empty string? Hmm, it's not bound to anything at all, so "null" would be more correct I guess. > o The whole item as not available for selection? And here comes the tricky part :) I would say that if a value is non-relevant, the item should not be choosable in a select(1), no matter the state of the label. (I would go for not displaying the item, but with a relevant label, you could possibly show a non-selectable/greyed-out label). A non-relevant label with a relevant value... I cannot see the use of it, but the item should then have a blank label? I'm not sure about this... > Same question when "unrolling" the xforms:itemset. Say you have > something like this: I think whatever behaviour is defined for an item, also goes for the "unrolled" items in an itemset. -- ... Allan
Received on Wednesday, 19 April 2006 16:30:46 UTC