- From: T.V Raman <raman@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 11:02:55 -0800
- To: unl@dreamlab.net, ?=@google.com
- Cc: public-forms@w3.org
please dont do this. non-xml serialization is nice, but neither the XML Infoset -- or the weighty model of WS* specs are things I'd recommend for a technology that wants to win on the Web. Ulrich Nicolas Lissé <unl@dreamlab.net> writes: > > All, > > I'd like to propose a rather substantial change to how the spec is > written: Like some other W3C specs (e.g. WSDL 2.0 [1]), we should > consider to define all XForms elements and attributes in terms of an XML > Infoset [2] model. Although this would cause a lot of work I see advantages: > > 1. We could allow non-XML serializations/representations of documents > containing XForms mark-up. This might be handy especially for XForms 1.2. > > 2. We could define an abstract component model for XForms, which might > be attracting to implementors. Furthermore, it would be easier to define > processing models for certain components or modules which have different > representations, e.g. submission's attributes on send/submit. > > What do you think? > > Regards, > Uli. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/REC-wsdl20-20070626/ > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-infoset-20040204/ > -- > Ulrich Nicolas Lissé -- Best Regards, --raman Title: Research Scientist Email: raman@google.com WWW: http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/ Google: tv+raman GTalk: raman@google.com, tv.raman.tv@gmail.com PGP: http://emacspeak.sf.net/raman/raman-almaden.asc
Received on Friday, 1 February 2008 19:03:14 UTC