- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 14:18:41 +0300
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Cc: mark.birbeck@x-port.net, public-html@w3.org
On May 3, 2007, at 23:47, Maciej Stachowiak wrote: > WF2 is more compatible in two senses: > > 1) WF2 syntax is designed so that most constructs will degrade > gracefully to reasonable behavior in browsers that only support > HTML4. Clearly that is not true of XForms. The fact that WF2 does > this better isn't just a matter of opinion. > > 2) WF2 is designed so that it can actually replace HTML4 forms and > still support existing content, rather than being a second parallel > mechanism. HTML4 forms support can't be removed without a > syntactically compatible replacement. This too is not just a matter > of opinion. 3) WF2 is designed to be implementable as script libraries without binary plug-in installation in IE6 (and 7). This constrains e.g. the repetition syntax. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 11:18:57 UTC