W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > December 2001

Re: XForms WD 20011207: instance content

From: Jim Wissner <jim@jbrix.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:19:21 -0500
Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.2.20011220130455.03cd3e18@pop3.kattare.com>
To: tvraman@almaden.ibm.com
Cc: www-forms@w3.org
At 09:59 AM 12/20/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>personal opinion --you sound worse than a broken record --
>
>things like XForms can stabilize and be interoperable only
>after people have had a chance to experiment with it in the
>real world to explore all the possibilities.
>
>Standardizing too many things too early can be just as bad
>as not standardizing at all.

Thanks for the opinion.  To be sure, I don't recall ever having stated 
otherwise.  My comments, some of which were solicited, were based exactly 
upon experimentation of some of the possibilities that lie beyond the 
standard [pick your flavor] browser structure. All I said was that, after 
having given much (what I considered to be) thoughtful feedback to this 
group, I was told that "It's easy to imagine XForms integrated with some 
new markup language that doesn't exist today. Until time travel technology 
improves, that sort of thing will never make XForms 1.0. "

If you can explain what I'm supposed to read into this other than that 
xforms 1.0 is going to be what it has to be, which is to work with "bread 
and butter" browsers, and not worry about custom stuff, then I'll happily 
reconsider.

I think you've forgotten my basic stance.  I *want* to be xforms 
compliant.  I have many users that want it.  I've praised xforms as a 
concept and a spec, as far as it is. I've acknowledged that the constraints 
of time and "demand by share" will dictate what 1.0 will and won't be.

So, while yes, standardizing on too many things too early can be a bad 
thing, I certainly agree.  But I've never asked for that.  I've asked one 
fundamental question that has never been answered:

How, with xforms controls being interspersable with a container's native 
markup in such a way that some of the native markup might impact the 
functional operation of the xform, can one build xforms that can be used 
across container types.

If I am out of line asking this sort of question, I apologize.  But I 
shouldn't be made the bad guy here just because I'm doing exactly what you 
said: experimenting in the real world to explore the possibilities.

Respectfully,
Jim



>     Jim> Well here are some screenshots from the last
>     Jim> version.  Note when looking at the code that it is
>     Jim> not xforms compliant.  The new version will be much
>     Jim> more compliant markup-wise, although as per my many
>     Jim> previous posts to this list, I don't know what the
>     Jim> heck that means.  Given Micah's most recent post
>     Jim> which in not-so-many-words stated that xforms 1.0
>     Jim> won't be what a custom app would need, I'm not
>     Jim> falling over backwards implementing it.  (Not
>     Jim> because I don't like the idea of the spec, but
>     Jim> because there is no rationale for it if there is no
>     Jim> reuse to be had.  As 1.0 stands, Xybrix could only
>     Jim> ever be compatible with Xybrix).  Anyway I'm
>     Jim> sounding like a broken record!
>
>     Jim> http://jbrix.org/kits/xybrix/screenshots/formdesign-1/screen-3.html
>
>     Jim> 
> http://jbrix.org/kits/xybrix/screenshots/formdesign-1/editor/xforms-document.html
>
>     Jim> Here's neat one of my app editor being created
>     Jim> inside my app editor!  :)
>
>     Jim> 
> http://jbrix.org/kits/xybrix/screenshots/appconstructor-1/screen-2.html
>
>     Jim> By the way this is a functional, swing-based
>     Jim> XML-markup-based, XML-editing application
>     Jim> framework.
>
>     Jim> Jim
>
>
>     Jim> At 06:31 PM 12/18/2001 -0800, T. V. Raman wrote:
>     >> Actually, I'd love to see your XForm editting a XForm
>     >> example --could you mail it to the list so it makes
>     >> it to the archives as well?  Thanks, --Raman
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> Best Regards, --raman
>     >> ------------------------------------------------------------
>     >>
>     >> IBM Research: Human Language Technologies Phone: 1
>     >> (408) 927 2608 Fax: 1 (408) 927 3012 Email:
>     >> tvraman@us.ibm.com WWW:
>     >> http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/raman PGP:
>     >> http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman.asc Snail: IBM Almaden
>     >> Research Center, 650 Harry Road San Jose 95120
>
>     Jim> -- jim@jbrix.org
>
>     Jim> Visit www.jbrix.org for: + SpeedJAVA jEdit Code
>     Jim> Completion Plugin + Xybrix XML Application
>     Jim> Framework + other great Open Source Software
>
>--
>Best Regards,
>--raman
>------------------------------------------------------------
>
>IBM Research: Human Language Technologies
>Phone:        1 (408) 927 2608
>Fax:        1 (408) 927 3012
>Email:        tvraman@us.ibm.com
>WWW:      http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/raman
>PGP:          http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman.asc
>Snail:        IBM Almaden Research Center,
>               650 Harry Road
>               San Jose 95120

--
jim@jbrix.org

Visit www.jbrix.org for:
   + SpeedJAVA jEdit Code Completion Plugin
   + Xybrix XML Application Framework
   + other great Open Source Software
Received on Thursday, 20 December 2001 13:16:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:21:50 GMT