W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > May 2006

RE: Deploying (accessible) XForms today?

From: Sikora, Gary <gjsikora@progeny.net>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 21:56:17 -0400
Message-ID: <D87E99FF33158340920A02117B96F5A476A697@es3.progeny.net>
To: "Stefano Debenedetti" <ste@demaledetti.net>, "Charles F Wiecha" <wiecha@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "Erik Bruchez" <ebruchez@orbeon.com>, <www-forms@w3.org>, <www-forms-request@w3.org>

An XForms processor implementation to ease this tension exists ...
FormFaces. We are sure there are many improvements needed ... FormFaces
open source at SourceForge ... please join in. 

-----Original Message-----
From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Stefano Debenedetti
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 15:43
To: Charles F Wiecha
Cc: Erik Bruchez; www-forms@w3.org; www-forms-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Deploying (accessible) XForms today?


Charles F Wiecha ha scritto:
> 
> Erik writes...
> 
>>>and Ajax is here to stay, which makes this is a very important topic.
> 
> Perhaps one angle to explore here is to work toward AJAX toolkits
having
> more direct support for XForms.  Many of them are now introducing data
> models, model-view binding notations, and event systems.  If these
were
> aligned more closely with XForms we'd have a much better story not
only
> for accessibiliy but in general...
> 
> Charlie Wiecha

Excellent point, btw it would be a great start if AJAX-based XForms
implementations offered interfaces and APIs that are sexier to the more
general AJAX crowd and/or that make it easy to integrate with frenzier
libraries... 

ciao
ste
 
> 
> 
> *Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>*
> Sent by: www-forms-request@w3.org
> 
> 05/05/2006 02:21 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	www-forms@w3.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	Re: Deploying (accessible) XForms today?
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raman,
> 
> I don't think that the fact that today's implementations do not meet
> accessibility requirements necessarily means they cannot. At least, I
> would like to see compelling arguments in that direction, and clearer
> technical details about exactly what is lost (and shouldn't be lost)
by
> going from XForms to XHTML.
> 
> IE is not supporting XForms anytime soon, and Ajax is here to stay,
> which makes this is a very important topic.
> 
> I think ignorance of the requirements for accessibility is a more
> important reason why most Ajax-based web applications maybe lack in
> accessibility. We are unfortunately as guilty as anyone here.
> 
> -Erik
> 
> T.V Raman wrote:
>>
>>>From what I've seen coming out of some of the server side
>> processors, I'm afraid your're correct
>>
>> Allan Beaufour writes:
>>  >
>>  > Since not everybody is using a browser with XForms capabilities,
if
>>  > you want to deploy XForms today, server-side transformations might
be
>>  > needed. But how about accessibility? I fear that you loose that
then?
>>  >
>>  > /me steps aside and hopes for some good answers from the
> server-side crowd :)
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > ... Allan
> 
> -- 
> Orbeon - XForms Everywhere:
> http://www.orbeon.com/blog/
> 
> 
Received on Saturday, 6 May 2006 01:56:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:04 GMT