W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-xml@w3.org > January 2011

Re: XForms Use Case

From: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:57:40 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTimk8wd5ttCR8SwK2D2Kz_w97xG6k6fKZbit4cGf@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>, "public-html-xml@w3.org" <public-html-xml@w3.org>
Hi,

Kurt wrote:
> I would invite you to take a look at what's actually happening in the
> XForms space before blithely dismissing it as irrelevant.

My intent wasn't to suggest that XForms isn't good technology, or that
XForms isn't being used to do great things. I was only commenting on the
reasonableness of introducing it as an additional Web vocabulary.

The Web stack had no retained-mode graphics capability, so making SVG
into a Web vocabulary was a very sensible thing to do (though,
admittedly, this was made difficult in several ways due to the impedance
mismatch between the XML stack and the Web stack). This argument applies
to MathML as well.

XForms, however, duplicates functionality of the existing Web stack in a
backwards-incompatible way, unlike SVG and MathML.

I think the right thing to do, instead of adopting XForms as a Web
vocabulary, is to look at how the Web's existing forms language can be
enhanced to support things that people want to use XForms for. Actually,
that's already happened to some extent: many of the forms features in
HTML5, introduced in Web Forms 2.0, are about doing just that.


Ted
Received on Wednesday, 12 January 2011 20:58:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 January 2011 20:58:35 GMT