- From: John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 10:22:18 -0700
- To: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com
- Cc: public-forms@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF0EF18556.709609E0-ON88257425.005F2136-88257425.005F71E8@ca.ibm.com>
Perhaps the first thing to do here would be response to the "architecture" emails from Anne and Maciej, just to keep the conversation going. I think that some of the things they are saying should be *included* in architecture statements, but notice how Maciej speaks only in the most general terms, whereas Anne's email is much more specific. We need to explain *what* we're doing to XForms to accommodate *what* we think they want on the HTML side. I think architectural alignment between an "on the glass" metaphor and an MVC architecture is what we're after. Maybe you would consider drafting up something to present on tomorrow's telecon? You could send it to the TF if you prefer, but if you'd rather get it in front of the WG first for refinement, we can give you some time... Thanks, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Technical Staff Member Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer Blog RSS feed: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 04/07/2008 12:24 AM To John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA cc public-forms@w3.org Subject Re: Forms Task Force members (roll call and call to action), Fw: Architectural Consistency - What does it mean? John, I am reading all Forms TF related e-mails, and if I think I can add something to the discussion I will certainly do. Moreover if some concrete work/or intent for doing some work arises I would definitely allocate time for it. But I'm not sure how we can get the ball running. Some people want to have weekly teleconferences, other don't (because they think discussing technical stuff by e-mail is better). Some people want to talk about syntax, others don't. ... I'm not sure how we can get best past these starting-up problems and start doing some real work. Regards, Nick Van den Bleeken - Research & Development Manager Inventive Designers Phone: +32 - 3 - 8210170 Fax: +32 - 3 - 8210171 Email: Nick_Van_den_Bleeken@inventivegroup.com PS.: I left early on Thursday and had a day off on Friday that's why it took so long before I replied. John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 04/04/2008 12:00 AM To "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net> cc "new Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org> Subject Re: Forms Task Force members (roll call and call to action), Fw: Architectural Consistency - What does it mean? I agree our working group has certainly been working very hard to get to the point where we have an idea of what and how to contribute to the results of the task force. In an ideal world, it might have gone somewhat faster for the TF to have developed more of what we have now, but I think it would have been esp. hard because the TF doesn't even seem to agree on the right level to do the thinking AND it really took the union of all our brain powers to figure out the thing we have now anyway. But as of yesterday, I really felt we had enough worked out to go forward with, and the HTML WG participants legitimated my thinking that we have not gone too far without pulling them in, so now seems to be the right time to get re-engaged. So I've heard from you now, and want to know whether Nick and Sebastian will also be able to do some work on a weekly basis to get some kind of output from this task force. Thank you, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Technical Staff Member Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer Blog RSS feed: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net> Sent by: public-forms-request@w3.org 04/03/2008 02:23 PM To John Boyer/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA cc "new Forms WG" <public-forms@w3.org> Subject Re: Forms Task Force members (roll call and call to action), Fw: Architectural Consistency - What does it mean? Hi John, I've made clear on the telecon and in a couple of emails to the TF that our 'activity' was predicated on some agreement from the XForms WG on what simplification means. So, yes, it's exciting that the WG has got some agreement on that, and that we can now get 'active' over here in the TF. But I'd hate for anyone to think that the lack of activity was down to myself, Nick and Sebastian. :) Regards, Mark On 03/04/2008, John Boyer <boyerj@ca.ibm.com> wrote: I think that Mark B, Nick and Sebastian are on the Forms task force. We now have some concrete ideas that can be used to develop *some* kind of reasonable output from the task force. I also received the following message (part of a larger message in www-archive) from a co-chair of the HTML WG (Dan C.): (1) I think the line between syntax and architecture is blurry at best, and I don't consider it out of order to discuss specific syntax proposals. I'm not sure that's the main objective of the task force, but I can imagine cases where it's helpful. (2) While many have observed that the current task force organization hasn't produced all that much, I'd like to give it a try for a at least a few more weeks. Now is the time for the three of you to become active on this TF. Please let me know *whether or not* you can do this. Thank you, John M. Boyer, Ph.D. Senior Technical Staff Member Lotus Forms Architect and Researcher Chair, W3C Forms Working Group Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Victoria Software Lab E-Mail: boyerj@ca.ibm.com Blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/JohnBoyer Blog RSS feed: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/rss/JohnBoyer?flavor=rssdw ----- Forwarded by John Boyer/CanWest/IBM on 04/03/2008 12:55 PM ----- Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com> Sent by: public-forms-tf-request@w3.org 04/02/2008 09:18 PM To public-forms-tf@w3.org cc Subject Architectural Consistency - What does it mean? In the interests of making a positive contribution to the Task Force: "Architectural Consistency" is a pretty broad term. One thing we should decide as a Task Force is what sense we intend it in. Here are some possible ways of interpreting "architectural consistency" between multiple forms technologies: 1) Both are consistent with the Web architecture as a whole (in other words, URIs for addressing, documents described as markup, REST architecture model, etc). 2) Both may be used together on the same Web site without conflict. 3) Both may be used together in the same Web document without conflict (for example, through use of XML namespaces to disambiguate). 4) Both are reasonably aligned in their capabilities where they overlap, without gratuitous differences. 5) One may be implemented in terms of the other through a prior server side translation (this would be a scenario such as "author in XForms, translate to HTML Forms for client-side deployment"). 6) One may be implemented in terms of the other through client-side script-based support (for example, XForms-like markup is sent to the client along with a script that translates the mechanisms to HTML Forms and implements the processing model). 7) Both must be describable in terms of a single server-side processing model. 8) Both must be describable in terms of a single client-side processing model. I would argue that 1-7 are all reasonable expectations for architectural consistency. As an example, SVG and HTML would satisfy criteria 1-3 and 5-7, and 4 is debatable (there is some overlap in areas with differences but it is in dispute whether this is necessary or not, and the groups are working on closer alignment). I would argue that #8 is too strong a requirement. For example, CSS and SVG have completely different models for layout. But because there are defined ways to interoperate, it is not generally argued that this makes them architecturally inconsistent. Similarly, http and ftp are completely different protocols from the client's perspective. But shared URI addressing and the request-response model bring them into an architecturally consistent whole. Any thoughts from other Forms TF members? Are there other criteria that you would see as part of "architectural consistency"? Mine are all pretty general to the Web and not very specific to Forms. Regards, Maciej -- Mark Birbeck mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 http://www.x-port.net | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com x-port.net Ltd. is registered in England and Wales, number 03730711 The registered office is at: 2nd Floor Titchfield House 69-85 Tabernacle Street London EC2A 4RR Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer: http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer
Received on Tuesday, 8 April 2008 17:23:56 UTC