Re: XForms Simplified Forms Syntax Review Needed

aloha --

i do not think it is the joint task force that is the blocker, but an 
unwillingness to sit down and hammer out a standard for next generation 
forms -- first, perhaps a requirements document is needed to placate
some, and then the real work can begin on a specific set of technical 
recommendations and implementation strategies...

i would object formally, strenuously and repeatedly if Web Forms 2.0 was
to be added to the HTML5 draft -- HTML5 and Web Forms 2.0 were submitted 
as 2 distinct documents, and it could only be the hypertext coordination 
group that could approve of incorporating Web Forms 2.0 into the HTML5 
working group draft in toto...  moreover, HTML WG members have never --
to my knowledge -- been asked to, let alone, approved Web Forms 2.0 as 
a working group draft...

but this is not solely an HTML WG or a Forms WG issue -- it is a 
fundamental issue facing the W3C -- do we work together to ensure the 
greatest possible harmonization and synchronization of constructs, syntax 
and grammar or are some working groups going to reinvent the wheel 
simply because they won't consider that there can be -- and must be -- 
a bi-directional bridge, nay symbiosis, between the XML and HTML halves 
of the MarkUp whole...

this is an issue that must be faced now, and one which should be 
considered in light of the plans to serialize HTML5 as an XHTML 
dialect/version -- will the XHTML serialization of HTML5 use HTML5-
specific forms mechanisms than which will be at odds (both logically 
and practically) with the movement towards XForms in the XML, XHTML, 
and other communities?

for the record, i do not have a problem with john attempting to 
provide constructive fodder for the joint task force -- in fact, 
i greatly appreciate the fact that he did -- i do not think it 
out of place in his role as chair of the Forms WG, and i copied my 
previous message to the chairs of the HTML working group, as well
as the staff contacts for both working groups (it was due to user 
error that they were added as BCCs rather than carbon-copied)

BRAIN, n.  An apparatus with which we think we think.
              -- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
         Gregory J. Rosmaita,
     Camera Obscura:
 Oedipus' Online Complex:

---------- Original Message -----------
From: Maciej Stachowiak <>
To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <>
Cc: John Boyer <>,, Forms WG
<> (new)
Sent: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:54:48 -0700
Subject: Re: XForms Simplified Forms Syntax Review Needed

> On Apr 2, 2008, at 1:29 PM, Gregory J. Rosmaita wrote:
> > aloha, fellow forms task force members!
> >
> > maciej wrote, quote:
> >> (Fellow Forms TF members, I think it's time we come up with a
> >> draft of  the guidelines so we can satisfy our obligations to
> >> the Forms WG and  HTML WG.)
> > unquote
> >
> > i believe that it is high time that the Forms and HTML working groups
> > reconsidered the joint forms task force and its goals, with an eye
> > towards dissolving the old task force and its charter, and drafting a
> > new one; we have been going nowhere at no particular speed, and it is
> > in everyone's best interest to consider not merely "guidelines" but
> > specific proposals -- as long as the HTML5 draft has a ToDo where the
> > "Forms" section should be, there will be very little progress on this
> > front, unless we re-examine the joint task force's purview...
> I am in favor of dissolving the Forms Task Force, since so far 
> we have  produced anything of value. However, I have felt 
> reluctant to propose  this, since I have been part of the 
> problem (have not really done  anything myself).
> I would be against chartering a Task Force to create a new set 
> of  elements and associated semantics to add to HTML. That is 
> the job of  the HTML WG. I would also be against chartering a 
> Task Force to create  a new syntax for XForms. That is the job 
> of the Forms WG.
>  From my superficial perusal of John's proposal, it does not 
> appear to  me that it would satisfy the HTML WG's Design 
> Principles as written.  Perhaps it will be improved such that it 
> does. It also seems pretty  incomplete, for example, what 
> exactly is the language used in the  "calculate" attribute,  But 
> I would be against using a Task Force to  bypass review by and 
> input from the full HTML Working Group.
> > if that is not acceptable to my fellow joint task force members, then
> > i suggest that the joint task force as currently constituted be
> > dissolved by mutual consent of the chairs of both working groups, and
> > that it be replaced with a task force that will produce more tangible
> > deliverables...  when i am asked about the gaping hole in the HTML5
> > draft where forms should be addressed, i'm not being queried as to
> > what theoretically might one day appear there, but specifically what
> > WILL appear there...
> The primary proposal on the table is Web Forms 2.0, an extension 
> to  HTML4 Forms that appears to satisfy the design principles. 
> Currently  its integration is blocked by waiting on the Forms TF 
> to complete its  work. I do not think creating a new TF with a 
> broader scope would  reduce this delay.
> > i proposed at our first (and so far only) telecon that we examine
> > dave raggett's XForms Transitional, but that suggestion went over
> > like the proverbial lead ballon...  we must, as a task force and
> > as members of our respective groups, reconsider our approach to
> > forms in HTML5 and XHTML and either be chartered/tasked with providing
> > concrete proposals, or we should remove HTML5 from TR space as a
> > working draft, for how can one write a specification for the web that
> > does not address forms, given the fact that i am using one to compose
> > this, use them every day to post to wikis, and to conduct ecommerce?
> I think the right thing to do is to integrate Web Forms 2 
> integrate  the HTML5 spec immediately. If a better proposal 
> comes along then it  should be entertained.  But we have a 
> complete and detailed proposal  in hand, which the HTML WG has 
> already voted to adopt. Right now it is  waiting on the Forms 
> TF. I would like to complete the HTML WG's  resolution to adopt 
> Web Forms 2 and take any proposals for changes  under review in 
> the normal way.
> Let us remove the Forms TF as a blocker to progress.
> Regards,
> Maciej
------- End of Original Message -------

Received on Wednesday, 2 April 2008 22:06:21 UTC