W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2007

Re: About the Web Forms 2 proposal

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:13:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0704261959000.1234@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> Web Forms 2 has taken as much features from XForms as possible to the 
> extend that it is feasible to integrate the XForms features in a model 
> that needs to be compatible with deployed HTML content and HTML 
> implementations.

This bears emphasis. The whole point of the Web Forms 2 work was to take 
the XForms architectural ideas and make them available to HTML authors, to 
help the transition to XForms (the introduction section even has a diagram 
showing this).

Web Forms 2.0 was originally called XForms Basic; we changed it at the 
request of the XForms working group.

Most (all?) of the ideas in XForms Transitional either were or are still 
in Web Forms 2.0. The ideas that are no longer there, or that have changed 
significantly since their original introduction, changed in response to 
community feedback to address issues with the proposals. These *exact same 
issues* have now been raised on XForms Transitional.

> This is why I think it would be useful if the people who prefer XForms 
> Transitional because Web Forms 2 doesn't meet the architectural goals of 
> XForms clarify what changes they would like to see made to Web Forms 2 
> that would bring it closer to those goals.

I would highly encourage the XForms Transitional proponents to send review 
comments on Web Forms 2.0 exactly as Anne suggests. The reverse has 
already happened. It will be very difficult to make forward progress 
without everyone fully engaging in this work -- and this means that 
reviews have to go both ways.

Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 20:13:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:19 UTC