W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms@w3.org > January 2007

Re: Comparison of XForms-Tiny and WF2

From: Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:10:15 -0800
To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Cc: Matthew Raymond <mattraymond@earthlink.net>, public-appformats@w3.org, public-appformats-request@w3.org, WHAT WG List <whatwg@whatwg.org>, www-forms@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF2D4B715A.1FDD165A-ON88257267.0062DB39-88257267.0063D10A@us.ibm.com>

Hi Dave,
Thanks for the update. Given that XF-T has already proven to run on today's
browsers, no matter how the W3C ends up reconciling XF-T vs WF2, it seems
to me that a MUST requirement is that the result of this XF-T vs WF2
reconciliation should be technology that can be implemented via a small
JavaScript library such that it can run on top of today's browsers.

It would also be nice if:

1) There was a highly modular open source implementation of this new (XF-T
vs WF2) technology which could be added as a module to the many fine Ajax
libraries that exist in the world.
2) There was some attention to make sure that this new (XF-T vs WF2)
technology were designed to integrate well with HTML/Ajax IDEs so that
developers can create and debug their applications using modern software
development approaches, such as WYSIWYG developer tools and integrated
debuggers.

Jon

Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
Web Architect, Emerging Technologies
IBM, Menlo Park, CA
Mobile: +1-650-926-5865



                                                                           
             Dave Raggett                                                  
             <dsr@w3.org>                                                  
                                                                        To 
             01/18/2007 09:44          Jon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/IBM@IBMUS  
             AM                                                         cc 
                                       Matthew Raymond                     
                                       <mattraymond@earthlink.net>,        
                                       public-appformats@w3.org,           
                                       public-appformats-request@w3.org,   
                                       WHAT WG List <whatwg@whatwg.org>,   
                                       www-forms@w3.org                    
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: Comparison of XForms-Tiny and   
                                       WF2                                 
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




On Thu, 18 Jan 2007, Jon Ferraiolo wrote:

> I have a very simple question from the land of Ajax (and OpenAjax
> Alliance). Can either XForms-Tiny or WF2 be implemented in
> JavaScript such they run on today's browsers, or do they both
> require new version of browsers (or plugins) to ship before the
> features can be used?
>
> Jon

XForms-Tiny does indeed run on today's browsers, see

   http://www.w3.org/2006/11/XForms-Tiny/

Where you can try it out for yourself on your browser on a wide
range of examples. This makes use of an open source cross browser
script library that works on Internet Explorer 6 and 7, Firefox 1.5,
Firefox 2, Opera 9, Konqueror 3.5, Safari, Opera Mobile 8.6 and
NetFront 3.4. When delivered via HTTP as a compressed file, the
download size is only 6 KBytes. The library will be updated to
reflect changes to the specification, and a first Working Draft is
expected in early 2007.

WF2 has been implemented as a script library for Internet Explorer
and in principle a cross browser library could be developed.
However, web page developers would still need to write additional
page specific scripts to match the features that are built into
XForms-Tiny. For a single page that might be okay but the costs soon
add up when accumulated across applications. A declarative approach
reduces the development cost and likelihood of errors. Another
advantage is the means to automatically generate the server side
validation from the markup rather than having to code it separately
with the risk of mismatch between the client and server code.

p.s. I am looking into providing declarative support for using Ajax to
support dynamic load and save operations without the need for any
additional scripting other than loading the XForms-Tiny library.

  Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett

>
> Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
> Web Architect, Emerging Technologies
> IBM, Menlo Park, CA
> Mobile: +1-650-926-5865





graycol.gif
(image/gif attachment: graycol.gif)

pic07761.gif
(image/gif attachment: pic07761.gif)

ecblank.gif
(image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif)

Received on Thursday, 18 January 2007 18:10:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 10 March 2012 06:22:08 GMT