Re: Question regarding TestCase 3.4.1.a and mustUnderstand (PR#2)

Steven and Forms WG,

I confirm that I am satisfied with this response.

Thanks,
Steve Speicher


Steven Pemberton <xforms-issues@mn.aptest.com> wrote on 06/13/2007 
04:32:20 PM:

> Steve, 
> 
> Thanks for these questions. The WG has resolved to remove 
> 'mustunderstand' from
> the spec.
> 
> Although your mail doesn't actually suggest a position, would you please 
reply
> to this email to confirm that you are satisified with this response?
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> For the Forms WG,
> 
> Steven Pemberton
> 
> > I have a question regarding the validity of the XForm's testsuite case
> > 3.4.1[1] with respect to mustUnderstand [2].
> > 
> > I know that some of these issues have already been raised [3] but 
wanted
> > to state that Mozilla XForms is currently not adding support for this 
[4]
> > due to some of these issues.
> > 
> > We are considering the test case 3.4.1 to be invalid until these 
issues
> > are resolved.
> > 
> > Here are some of the issues with mustUnderstand:
> >    - When does it get evaluated?  Must it be handled prior to 
xforms-ready
> > or say if it's in a switch/case, only when the case is activated?
> >    - Can mustUnderstand be manipulated by script? If nodes are 
dynamically
> > added to layout but conflicts with mustUnderstand, what error should
> > occur?
> > 
> > Perhaps a better fallback mechanism should be used.  Though I might
> > propose completely removing mustUnderstand as I don't know of anyone 
who
> > has implemented it.  Another thought is to seek feedback or give
> > requirements to the CDF WG [5], as they are currently dealing with 
such
> > issues around mixing namespace documents and content negotiation and
> > fallback handling of unknown content.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Steve Speicher
> > 
> > [1]
> > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/Test/XForms1.0/Edition2/Chapt3/3.
> 4/3.4.1/3.4.1.a.xhtml
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/slice3.html#module-mustUnderstand
> > [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Aug/0149
> > [4] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=299255
> > [5] http://www.w3.org/2004/CDF/
> > 
> > 
> >

Received on Thursday, 14 June 2007 07:01:44 UTC