- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 09:13:17 -0700
- To: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Last night, I discussed with John Boyer and others the meaning of the architectural consistency goal for HTML Forms and XForms. Here was John's first cut at a list of requirements. I think these are a fine starting point as a set of architectural consistency requirements; perhaps the Forms Task Force can refine them further. My expectation is that both the next version of HTML Forms and the next version of XForms should satisfy a list of requirements along these lines. I'm quoting him directly, but these probably want wording clean-up if they are to be used as a starting point. It was suggested to me by others that Web Forms 2 (our current proposed starting point) may already satisfy some or all of these requirements, which would be good news for the possibility of meeting our architectural consistency goals. I would appreciate it if a Web Forms 2 expert (perhaps Ian or Anne) could address whether Web Forms 2 satisfies any of these requirements, with examples. 1) I want a tag set that means the same thing whether it is serialized as XML or not 2) I want a tag set that maps to data model constructs in the XForms architecture where appropriate 3) I can see there is a desire to attach data model properties to UI controls; fine, so let the names of the UI controls suggest the data model... and let the hierarchic structure of the UI suggest the structure of the data... and let the properties defined on those controls suggest properties on the data. 4) It should be possible to submit the suggested data as XML, and to indicate either receipt of a new replacement document or a new data 5) It should be really easy to grow or shrink "repeated" data (as expressed by repeated controls) 6) it should be easy to receive prepop data for things that repeat and yet still have a way to add new "rows" that are empty 7) It should be possible to delete until a repeating construct is empty and then be able to insert to get an empty one row "Table" 8) It should be possible to express relevance, readonlyness, datatype, constraints on value, and calculated value This is a great set of requirements because it is all about functionality, rather than syntax, allowing us to design HTML forms to provide features to satisfy these, but using syntax that is backwards compatible and degrades gracefully. John mentioned that these thoughts were off the cuff, and he may have forgotten some important points. I would appreciate it if XForms experts Regards, Maciej
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2007 17:24:55 UTC