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 15:45:46 +0000
Message-ID: <851c8d31050104074528437f26@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:29:16 +0000, James Graham <jg307 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> It's not only an extreme example, it's a terrible example. Google have
> repeatedly shown that they have no interest in using the semantics
> available in HTML,

That's because there is no semantics in HTML other than web document
semantics, something it is actually highly likely it uses - since most
other search engines do.  Hn elements more important, google lists
reading from OL/UL etc.

> Even allowing that your example is misguided, I'm not sure I believe the
> rest of the argument either. In order to believe that HTML should be
> starved in order that XForms should flourish,

It's not a case of starving one to boosting another, the point is that
incremental edge additions to HTML won't achieve anything, would
XForms, who knows, I personally doubt it until there's a rendering
model beyond HTML in the mix.

> you have to take the
> position that there will be a migration to XForms (and XHTML) from HTML.
> In order to believe that this will offer a significant advantage to the
> semantics of the web, you have to believe that authors will tend to use
> the new features offered by XForms in the way that they are designed to
> be used. In practice, I'm thoroughly unconvinced of the first and
> skeptical of the second.

However you have the same problems with the migration to WebForms and
WebApplications from HTML, you have to believe that it'll offer
significant advantage (I can see none, since it simply doesn't work on
any user agents yet, and there's no likelyhood of it happening on IE -
especially if binary plugins are rejected as a solution.)

You can't claim the migration to XForms won't happen, but somehow the
migration to WebForms will, they both suffer from the same fundamental
problems - You can create compatible WebForms docs within the single
document, but it's far from trivial, and you miss out on quite a few
of the benefits.  I don't in fact believe it will be easy enough for
your normal developer, just like XForms isn't - It took Ian a few
attempts to create the few basic examples on the site, and he's hardly
your average developer.

Jim.
Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2005 07:45:46 UTC

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