- From: Robert Sayre <mint@franklinmint.fm>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2004 18:20:48 -0400
Ben Meadowcroft wrote: >>On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 14:28:19 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson >><ian at hixie.ch> wrote: >> >> >>>>Would it also be possible that the Web Forms 2.0 specification >>>>allowed additional '@enctype' values, like 'application/atom+xml'? >>>> >>>> >>>If the Atom spec specifies how to convert a Web Forms 2.0 form data >>>set into an 'application/atom+xml' encoded form data set, >>> >>> >>then UAs can >> >> >>>implement it. >>> > >Transforming WF2 data to atom would be a mapping that would be best >defined by the form author surely? Perhaps one way to do this would be to >allow a form submitting x-www-form-xml encoded data to be transformed >using XSLT on the data, this could be done on the server or it could be >done on the client, e.g. > ><form > action="http://example.com/atom.endpoint" > enctype="application/x-www-form+xml" > target-enctype="application/atom+xml" > transformation="http://example.com/atom.transform.wf2" > method="post"> > >This would then provide an extensible mechanism for advanced uses of XML >submission in a variety of domain specific XML languages such as atom. > > Although this proposal is an interesting general solution, I think UAs would also have to implement the Atom Publishing Protocol (APP) [1] to do anything useful with Atom representations in a standardized fashion. APP is not based on RPC-over-HTTP, like other blogging protocols, but it requires a bit more HTTP choreography than is present in the WF2 model. That mismatch makes it difficult for me to see how a browser would be useful as a general APP client in the absence of WAML and/or XMLHTTP features. Robert Sayre [1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-00.txt
Received on Sunday, 11 July 2004 15:20:48 UTC