W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-forms@w3.org > January 2008

Re: A rose by any other name...

From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:47:39 -0800
Message-ID: <18330.26379.267151.650526@retriever.corp.google.com>
To: sebastian@dreamlab.net
Cc: mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com, wiecha@us.ibm.com, boyerj@ca.ibm.com, public-forms@w3.org, public-forms-request@w3.org

Call it XForms 1.1 Xtensible Web Applications.
If people stop and ask how the one expands to the other, you've
succeeded in making the sale.

Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer writes:
 > 
 > Maybe my previous was too long and unclear, I proposed
 > an additional (sub)name for the next version number:
 > 
 > "XForms 1.1: XYZ"
 > 
 > Keep XForms - add something to it thats a bit broader.
 > 
 > Names do matter, after all.
 > 
 > - Sebastian
 > 
 > Mark Birbeck schrieb:
 > > Hello all,
 > > 
 > > With respect to everyone on this, the 'naming' discussion always seems
 > > to come up in a context where people wish some 'x' was more
 > > successful, and assume that it will be if they change the name.
 > > 
 > > Yet some of the most well known items have names that by this logic
 > > should simply not work; renting a DVD? Downloaded some MP3s? Does your
 > > computer have a 486? (Ok, that one is dated...but non-technical people
 > > really used to talk about having a 486.) And don't even think about
 > > phones; you've surely heard people talking about getting a 6500 or a
 > > 5610.
 > > 
 > > So let's not kid ourselves that the name really means anything. (Which
 > > is how I've always interpreted Shakespeare's point about roses -- that
 > > what we call something is irrelevant, it's its nature that matters.)
 > > 
 > > But perhaps the biggest argument against a name change is the legacy
 > > one. Over the last few years we've built up tutorials, samples, blog
 > > posts, implementations, tools, and so on, based on the name 'XForms'.
 > > And we all know that recently Yahoo! announced that XForms was the
 > > inspiration for the latest release of its mobile platform.
 > > 
 > > So, just as interest is growing, do we now want to change the name?
 > > 
 > > There are lots of things that need to be done to speed up adoption,
 > > but I think the name  of the technology is the least of our problems.
 > > 
 > > Regards,
 > > 
 > > Mark
 > > 
 > > On 25/01/2008, Charles F Wiecha <wiecha@us.ibm.com> wrote:
 > >> Well...this broader vision for XForms is certainly why I joined the WG, and
 > >> have been interested in the "Backplane" ideas for some time.  Indeed the
 > >> phrase Backplane is intended to imply the broader applicability of
 > >> "components" such as submission, data model, validation, MVC binding and
 > >> events to broader web applications -- in a variety of host languages and
 > >> platforms just as XForms applies to those cases as well.
 > >>
 > >> In my own work, apart from the WG, I've often been asked why I keep so
 > >> focused on "forms" when the web is so much broader.  I spend a lot of
 > >> effort explaining how the above ideas have incubated in forms but are in
 > >> fact part of the deeper web stack.  I'm getting pretty tired of this and
 > >> frankly it's starting to be a handicap so I'd welcome some help in a name
 > >> change here :}
 > >>
 > >> Thanks, Charlie
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>          A rose by any other name...
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>          John Boyer
 > >>                    to:
 > >>                      Forms WG (new)
 > >>                                                                 01/24/08 07:36 PM
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>          Sent by:
 > >>                public-forms-request@w3.org
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >> In some ways it's too bad that the need for dynamic, interactive XML
 > >> applications arose first in the web forms space.
 > >>
 > >> One reason is that we called it XForms, and it has always been a challenge
 > >> to get people excited about forms.  They have too many pre-conceived
 > >> notions about the uses and limitations of forms technology based on their
 > >> prior experiences with older technologies for delivering forms.  Whether
 > >> purely instantiated with paper, or whether it's a print and fill or even a
 > >> fill and print system, or an old html form, the dynamism of what we do
 > >> today seems to me qualitatively different than what is done with those
 > >> other technologies.
 > >>
 > >> It's a little like comparing a bicycle and a car on the basis that both
 > >> involve the use of wheels to get you from point A to point B.  Bit of a
 > >> stretch, don't you think?
 > >>
 > >> Similarly, calling our dynamic interactive XML applications "XForms"
 > >> because forms collect data is also a bit of a stretch.  The word "form"
 > >> just doesn't evoke the full measure of business process enablement of which
 > >> so-called "XForms" are capable.  Whether you ascribe to the more ephemeral
 > >> view in which an XForm serves as the intelligent front-end face of the
 > >> business process, or whether you subscribe to the philosophy of the
 > >> intelligent document as the fundamental unit of information interchange in
 > >> a business process, the simple fact remains that calling our information
 > >> processing assets "forms" is about as informative as trying to sell
 > >> "plants" when you mean to sell roses.  The rose does smell just as sweet no
 > >> matter what you call it, but if you call it a plant, you won't attract as
 > >> many customers.
 > >>
 > >> So, isn't it time for the name XForms (plant) to be changed to something
 > >> more reflective of what XForms is (a rose)?
 > >>
 > >> John M. Boyer, Ph.D.
 > >> Senior Technical Staff Member
 > >> Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher
 > >> Chair, W3C Forms Working Group
 > >> Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
 > >> IBM Victoria Software Lab
 > >> E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com
 > >>
 > >> Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer
 > >> Blog RSS feed:
 > >> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>
 > > 
 > > 
 > 

-- 
Best Regards,
--raman

Title:  Research Scientist      
Email:  raman@google.com
WWW:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/
Google: tv+raman 
GTalk:  raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com
PGP:    http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 22:48:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 October 2013 22:06:46 UTC