[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [uiml] Summary of issues raised by Takashi Endo and suggested UIML 4.0 changes
Hi, I attached the modified specification. I decided to rename the "id"-attribute of the variable-element into "name", to avoid confusion. Variables don't need a unique identifier, since naming conflicts are resolved with the scoping rules and real ID's would be too restrictive. I changed sections 6.8.5.1, 6.9 and the variable-element in the DTD. All should be visible with track changes. BR, Robbie. -- _/ Dr. Robbie Schaefer _/ Phone: +49 5251 60-6107 _/ _/ Visual Interactive Systems _/ Fax: +49 5251 60-6065 _/ _/ C-LAB Fuerstenallee 11 _/ _/ _/ D-33102 Paderborn _/ URL: http://www.c-lab.de _/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Helms" <jhelms@gmail.com> To: "Robbie Schaefer" <robbie@c-lab.de> Cc: <uiml@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Jo Vermeulen" <jo.vermeulen@uhasselt.be> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 3:23 PM Subject: Re: [uiml] Summary of issues raised by Takashi Endo and suggested UIML 4.0 changes > Robbie, > > Yes, go ahead and update that version. I have a version I am working, > but I have not touched the variable section so it should be easy to > merge. > > Thank you! > Jim > > On 12/4/07, Robbie Schaefer <robbie@c-lab.de> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > That is a good point. I like the way DISL handles this, but we have >> > two considerations: 1) UIML sets a precedent with the <property> >> > element that establishes "name" as the way to reference an existing id >> > without conflicting; and 2) the additional reference attribute still >> > leaves us with the issue of having conflicting id's. The DISL >> > approach is very good for readability, but I think the problem Mr. >> > Endo had was related to limitations of the DOM specification that only >> > allows you to look up single elements by id. >> >> OK, now I got it :-) >> I could update the relevant parts WRT variables (Section 6.9 and the >> DTD). >> Do I have the most current version? (uiml-core-4.0-draft_RS021007.doc) >> >> All the best, >> Robbie. >> -- >> _/ Dr. Robbie Schaefer _/ Phone: +49 5251 60-6107 _/ >> _/ Visual Interactive Systems _/ Fax: +49 5251 60-6065 _/ >> _/ C-LAB Fuerstenallee 11 _/ _/ >> _/ D-33102 Paderborn _/ URL: http://www.c-lab.de _/ >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jim Helms" <jhelms@gmail.com> >> To: "Robbie Schaefer" <robbie@c-lab.de> >> Cc: <uiml@lists.oasis-open.org> >> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 3:38 PM >> Subject: Re: [uiml] Summary of issues raised by Takashi Endo and >> suggested >> UIML 4.0 changes >> >> >> > Robbie, thanks for you input! Additional comments below. >> > >> > On 12/3/07, Robbie Schaefer <robbie@c-lab.de> wrote: >> >> > Suggested change: add an attribute to <variable> called "id-ref" >> >> > that >> >> > is used to reference a variable after it is declared. >> >> >> >> We had thought of this when designing DISL and the current sulution in >> >> the >> >> UIML-DTD is that we have an additional attribute for the variable >> >> which >> >> specifies wether it is used as a declaration or as a reference: >> >> reference >> >> (true|false) "true". >> >> >> >> However if all agree that id-ref is the more proper/consitent solution >> >> (since it is used in other UIML-elements in the same fashion) I could >> >> go >> >> through the relevant parts in the spec and change the examples and >> >> explanations. >> >> >> >> The point in favor of the "reference"-Attribute is that it is >> >> implicitly >> >> set >> >> true, so that only once, for the declaration, a variable needs to >> >> state >> >> the >> >> reference attribute, which IMHO adds to the readability of the >> >> UIML-document. >> >> >> >> Anyway, I am open to both options. >> > >> > That is a good point. I like the way DISL handles this, but we have >> > two considerations: 1) UIML sets a precedent with the <property> >> > element that establishes "name" as the way to reference an existing id >> > without conflicting; and 2) the additional reference attribute still >> > leaves us with the issue of having conflicting id's. The DISL >> > approach is very good for readability, but I think the problem Mr. >> > Endo had was related to limitations of the DOM specification that only >> > allows you to look up single elements by id. One way to solve this >> > and use the DISL scheme would be to use a different attribute as the >> > name of the variable and have an id attribute that's sole purpose is >> > to uniquely identify the element within the document. >> > >> > Whatever we decide, I believe we should choose a consistent scheme to >> > handle this for <property>, <variable>, and <param>. Thus using id in >> > the declaration and name for the references may serve for this version >> > of the specification with further improvements to come in the next >> > version. >> > >> > Just my thoughts :) >> > Jim >> >>
uiml-core-4.0-draft_RS051207.doc
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]