W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-app-backplane@w3.org > December 2008

Re: Draft outline of XG report for discussion in today's telecon

From: Charles F Wiecha <wiecha@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 09:56:25 -0500
To: public-xg-app-backplane <public-xg-app-backplane@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF438C305C.8623D273-ON85257513.0051C220-85257513.005200C6@us.ibm.com>
More readable version...Charlie


Standards-based Rich Web Applications

I. Introduction – the need for “Rich” Web applications
   a. Evolution of the web as the platform for high-function applications,
not just “content”

II. What do we mean by “Rich” anyway?
   a. It’s really about function – apps that can support core processes:
not just “transient” etc
   b. Apps can be Rich in different ways
      i. Presentation: Rich media, the common meaning of RIAs
      ii. Data: Validation, intelligent prefilling to avoid data entry
      iii. Logic/Control: Rich interaction, supportive and intelligent data
entry, context sensitive controls, skipping steps etc
      iv. Server connection: async interaction to support all of the above

III. Benefits of being Rich
   a. Improved user experience
   b. Performance
   c. Accessibility
   d. Platform portability – different UIs for different platforms
   e. Offline support
   f. Composability – white box extensibility (the App as extension point)

IV. Architectural patterns in Rich Web Applications – the Backplane
   a. MVC patterns for Web applications
   b. Coordination patterns to aid transparency and composition:
event-based patterns
   c. Implicit coordination pattern: “data as API”
   d. Submission patterns
      i. Submission as submission: page complete
      ii. Incremental data refresh
      iii. Delegation of event processing to the server (field to field
   e. Vendor-centric examples in practice today: MXML, XAML, Laszlo

V. Addressing the platform support question for Rich Web Applications –
   a. XML on the client – Javascript as tag library language not
programming model
   b. The Ubiquity project example for XForms
   c. Potential for other namespaces where processing models are important,
i.e where XML is beyond a data-format but also an application model:
      i. SMIL
      ii. SVG (depends also on having lower-level graphics, eg. Canvas,
      iii. Open Document Format (ODF)
      iv. Industry vertical standards, e.g. XBRL, ACORD, HL7
      v. Long-tail of “Niche” namespaces: molecular markup language

VI. Getting from here to there: bridging from HTML to RIAs
   a. RIA patterns “projected” onto HTML
   b. Example: XForms for HTML
   c. Implementation in the Ubiquity project

VII. Examples of Rich Web Applications from the Backplane XG’s work
   a. MVC pattern: YUI widgets with XForms data binding
   b. Submission pattern: XForms-based Dojo data provider
   c. Implicit coordination pattern: data as API
      i. SMIL+XHTML
      ii. Voice+XHTML via data model not controls (i.e. beyond X+V)
      iii. ODF+XHTML

VIII. Going forward: potential for future work/exploration
   a. Leveraging RIA patterns for common end-to-end programming model
      i. Deployment-time positioning of validation logic
      ii. Smarter network intermediaries – data filling at portals etc
   b. Others…

Charles Wiecha
Manager, Multichannel Web Interaction
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
P.O. Box 704
Yorktown Heights, N.Y.  10598
Phone: (914) 784-6180, T/L 863-6180, Cell: (914) 320-2614
Received on Tuesday, 2 December 2008 14:57:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:50:45 UTC