- From: Allan Beaufour <beaufour@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 10:10:10 +0200
- To: "David Landwehr" <david.landwehr@solidapp.com>
- Cc: www-forms@w3.org
On 4/20/06, David Landwehr <david.landwehr@solidapp.com> wrote: > To me it sounds like there is a real push for AVT from implementors and > as long the attributes which can contain AVT values does not changed the > processing model then there is no problem in implementing it (e.g. > having AVT in the @model attribute or @ref/@bind is difficult to > implement where having it in dispatch/@name is easy). I agree. John mentions that it "keeps coming up over and over and over again.", and I think there is a reason. People want to use it... I definately believe that we should investigate how to include AVT support in XForms -- or once and for all find a definitive reason for why we should not. It's not a foreign concept in "w3-land"... http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#attribute-value-templates > From an authoring perspective I would *much* rather have AVT than > writing an setvalue event handler which can change the @action URL. IMO > AVT is the intuitive solution for this problem. I agree 100%, but others might think exactly the same for the setvalue approach :) But if both camps can be satisfied, well why not? :) -- ... Allan
Received on Thursday, 20 April 2006 08:10:20 UTC