Re: [WSG] A California meeting? was Brisbane July Meeting - Report
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 09:10:52 +1000, Lachlan Hardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So if, as someone suggested (Peter again?), everyone were to put the closest major city they are willing to attend a meeting at, those numbers might increase a bit Good idea. I've changed my location from Castro Valley to San Francisco. Maybe other Californians would do the same? -- Sean A Corfield -- http://www.corfield.org/blog/ If you're not annoying somebody, you're not really alive. -- Margaret Atwood * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] A California meeting? was Brisbane July Meeting - Report
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 09:52:55 -0700, Tricia Fitzgerald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about a more central USA location like Chicago, IL? I suspect we'll end up having a whole bunch of regional meetings if this is going to happen at all. I'm in the Bay Area, California and Sacramento is *just* within reasonable reach to hold an evening meeting, for *some* parts of the Bay Area. San Francisco is more central (indeed, BACFUG - Bay Area ColdFusion User Group - meets in SF and gets folks from Sacramento sometimes even tho' they have their own UG). I can see a Bay Area WSG meeting drawing folks from all over the Bay Area - Sacramento to San Jose and maybe a little further afield. I can also see an Orange County WSG meeting drawing folks from the greater LA area and down as far as San Diego. I don't see folks from the West Coast going to Chicago just for a WSG meeting - a full-blown two day conference maybe, but not just a meeting. Same with the East Coast folks (there should be a good concentration of them to make a 'local' DC-based meeting worthwhile I'd expect). Question to Peter - is the city/state level membership information available in aggregate so we can figure out what might work for regional US meetings? * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] xforms
On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:57:08 +1000, Barry Beattie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It seems that the next version of ColdFusion will be using XForms as a version of CFFORM / Correct. According to what has been demo'd you will be able to auto-generate XForms from a simple form specification using cfform and the 'skinning' is done server side (by specifying an XSL file in cfform). If you're targetting an XForm-capable browser, I guess you could supply an empty XSL transform... * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
