- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 13:03:35 -0700
- To: "Allan Beaufour" <beaufour@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-forms@w3.org, www-forms-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OFEA5A7EE5.09EF525D-ON88257164.0060293A-88257164.006E30A3@ca.ibm.com>
Hi Allan, Apologies, I missed your email of April 4 asking for more information about my posting. Because others may not want to go fishing for that email, I'll explain again: I asked what other implementers were doing when a form author attempts to assign a non-datatype using the XForms type MIP. You responded that you didn't understand the question because a datatype can be simple or complex and then asked what was missing... The issue is that the notion of datatype is clearly defined in XML schema to be a validation of character string content. The datatype of string content could come from a simple type or from a complex type. The part I believe you were missing from my last post was that I did not make note to the reader of the fact that complex types can exist for more than one reason. Some complex types still only assign simple content to the elements they describe. These are elements that have no element children (this includes mixed content, of course). What I am getting at is that the XForms type MIP, by definition, is used for assigning a datatype. This implies that an element being tested for validity against a type MIP setting should only be reporting the result of the datatype validity (as defined in Schema Part 2) even if the type assigned is complex. Moreover, I wouldn't expect an XForms processor to even test for type MIP conformance on a node with element children. I base this opinion on the fact that the default is xsd:string (see section 6.1.1), which cannot validate structured data. I asked what others are doing partly to raise awareness of what the spec actually says about the type MIP because I've heard a lot of comments recently that caused me to believe that at least some folks believed that the type MIP could be used to assign a structural complex type, so I've asked the working group members and implementers to have a look at this issue. Thanks, 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 05/04/2006 01:47 AM To John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA cc www-forms@w3.org Subject Re: Because type is for datatype, there should not be a problem for XForms Basic On 5/3/06, John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> wrote: > On the technical question you asked, I think that mixed content would never be invalid according to > the XForms type MIP because XForms type is only for assigning datatypes, which means to me that > the type MIP has nothing whatsoever to do with elements that do not contain datatype-able content. And to me datatypes are both simple and complex schema types. Regarding that, I asked you what I missed (if anything) in a mail of April 4th. You never answered. > The example you give below of xforms:input ref="/data" would actually cause a binding to the first > text node child of the data element, not the data element itself. That's not true. The binding is to the element, but the displayed content is the first text node child of data. JB: True, my mistake. The data content display *and* exchanged with the model is based on the first text node, but validity assessments seem to be a bit of a different story, which was the relevant piece here. -- ... Allan
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2006 20:05:58 UTC