W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2005

[whatwg] Web Forms 2.0 - what does it extend , definition of same, relation to XForms, implementation reqs.

From: Jim Ley <jim.ley@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 11:38:47 +0000
Message-ID: <851c8d31050104033865519631@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 10:23:54 +0200, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen at iki.fi> wrote:
> Shipping FooML over the network is not more Semantic Web
> friendly, since software written by others are not aware of the
> semantics of FooML.

Yet there are a huge number of known XML formats that could be used
instead of FooML that do have well defined and well known semantics,
these can be very sensibly used.  Masahide Kanzaki and Morten
Friedrichsons work on XSLT transformations of RDF/XML shows how
possible this is.

> Eh? WF 2.0 is adding more declarativeness compared to WF 1.0 + JS.

Yes, but it's not adding enough to really make a difference, and is
actually lengthening the life of the javascript mess, now I'm happy
with that, I generally get paid for sorting out just such messes, but
really, I'd still like to see it go away.

WF2 still needs it, in fact, it's almost certainly going to increase
the need of it, as people are going to want the features in IE and
will start writing large shims to try and make it work.

Scraping the presentation layer to ensure there's no spamming, and
it's consistent with the data layer is a much better problem for
search engines that trying to infer the semantics from the
presentation layer, that's hardly been a great success.

Jim.
Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2005 03:38:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:20 UTC