RE: [oic] form interoperability

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

Wonderful,

You've found another place where QName prefixes are used in attributes as a
form of extension.  (The famous one is table:formula of course, the elephant
under the carpet is scripts.)   Good, there's a conversation over on ODF 1.2
about figuring out what to do about any or all of these under a desire for a
"pure" conformance level.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Hanssens Bart [mailto:Bart.Hanssens@fedict.be] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 06:41
To: oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [oic] form interoperability

Mm, I'm trying to come up with a test document for forms, but I stumbled
upon this:


* ODF 1.1, 11.4.2 Control Implementation
A control may be given a control type attribute, which determines which
concrete rendition or implementation the user agent should instantiate.
For easy extensibility, the value of this attribute is a namespaced
token,
i.e., it is token using a namespace prefix, much like attributes in XML.


So the form:control-implementation would be like a hint, not required to
get the field rendered in a reassuring dull way, right ?

If so, shouldn't this be in the application-specific settings.xml
instead of being sprinkled out over the form ? In settings.xml, you
could then define something like "render all textarea's using a really
spiffy control"


Best regards,

Bart

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php