Re: HTML forms, XForms, Web Forms - which and how much?

On Apr 26, 2007, at 22:33, Dailey, David P. wrote:

> Let me see if the following statements are accurate. (I am certain  
> that several folks weill tell me if they aren't)
> a) the WHATWG has a forms doc

Yes. Not only is there a doc, there is a shipping native  
implementation as well (Opera 9).

> b) the HTML WG has a charter says "new HTML forms and the new  
> XForms Transitional [should] have architectural consistency"

I think that was a weird thing to put in the charter considering the  
status of XForms Transitional. But yeah, that's what the charter says.

> c) W3C has XForms, and the newer XForms2 (under development) as  
> well as XFormsTransitional ( 
> Transitional/) which is a way for HTML folks to use XForms without  
> namespaces.

This is not accurate. XForms and XForms Transitional are totally  
different. XForms is a complex form spec for XML-based host languages  
only. XForms Transitional is a relatively rough draft for extensions  
to HTML forms. The main commonality between XForms and XForms  
Transitional is the name and the abstract idea that there are  
declarative constraints. However, XForms Transitional is not XForms  
proper without namespaces.

> d) XForms are meant to be used in markups other than just HTML

XForms is meant to be used only in XML-based host languages--not in  
HTML at all.

Henri Sivonen

Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 21:43:47 UTC