- From: Aaron Reed <aaronr@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:40:04 -0600
- To: www-forms@w3.org
Hi Erik, Relevant and readonly attributes on xf:controls? Really? There might be some really good use cases that the W3C is looking at to consider this but my first reaction is, "ewwwww". Relevancy and readonly-ness is the state of the instance node and the control is just reflecting that state. Why would a control be relevant or readonly if it isn't bound to data? I can see a form author wanting to make a button appear or disappear easily with an attribute since the button isn't bound to instance data, but they can already do this with CSS. Or heck, they can use a native widget from the host language and use the attributes that that native widget already supports. Nothing wrong with having a xhtml:button in a xhtml document or a xul:button in a xul document. You can listen for a DOMActivate on a native widget just as easily as on a xf:control. I guess that I just don't get the value of adding attributes like this to the XForms spec. Can you give an example? Thanks, --Aaron Erik Bruchez wrote: > > Guntis Ozols wrote: > >> In real life, for me it means that I have to create helper instance + >> helper >> bindings (bloating, again), just to manage relevant/readonly for buttons, >> because there is NO node in instance data with proper values for these >> attributes. If that's the intention, could this be clarified in the spec. >> Otherwise, attribute solution is preferred. > > While this won't be in XForms 1.1, the XForms Working Group has been > thinking about allowing model item properties directly on controls. As > you correctly point out, this can simplify the code, like with triggers > as you point out, but also in the spirit of smoothing the transition > from HTML forms to XForms and allowing developers to create a model only > when really necessary. > > -Erik >
Received on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 19:56:10 UTC