- From: Bill McCoy <bmccoy@adobe.com>
- Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 10:18:29 -0800
Sure, let's take the blogosphere as a canonical example of what we're all trying to achieve. Viewing an individual is largely in the "published HTML document" model, I agree. But we don't need "WebForms 2.0" for that. So lets take richer blogosphere solutions. Clearly XML (RSS/Atom) is proliferating as the baseline of client-server communication for viewing news feeds. Today the desktop news reader applications of choice are native client applications (e.g. NewNewsWire, AmphetaDesk). Sure, web app solutions exist (e.g. Bloglines) but they are clunky and don't provide the desired benefits of offline browsing and rich user experience for managing your posts, and they weren't easy to create either. And they in general have the same usability relationship to native news readers as web mail client apps to associated native clients. Exchange and IMAP servers have webmail but no one wants to use it if they can use a native Outlook, Eudora, etc. And HTML forms as-is is clearly "good enough" for a basic front-end to a PHP+MySQL, Perl or Struts-type weblog system, as demonstrated by the hundreds of such systems in existence. Native clients are also becoming popular for post authoring/editing too. But this is more the limitations of single-page-at-a-time and online-only HTML (limitations not addressed by "Web Forms 2.0"). With XML technologies like XForms and SVG, one could imagine building a client for news reading (even for editing/managing/HTML-publishing) that would be portable across a set of adopting user agents but provide the visual richness and offline usability of a native client app. And the complexity level of devloping such a declarative solution could be much lower than a PHP+MySQL weblog system, much less developing a native app like AmphetaDesk and porting to every platform. The only steps towards this today is Flash-based solutions which are proprietary and built on a "stage and timeline" architecture not really suitable for apps. And, again, XAML is coming. The main things lacking to make a "AmphetaDesk as web app" easy: a strong XML data-model architecture with capable binding to presentation and granular instantiation from HTTP sources and web services, avoiding the page-at-a-time and online-only bottelnecks of HTML. Huh, sounds like XForms. So again I hear WHATWG folks advocating pouring in a bunch of "Web Forms 2.0" extensions to the "Street HTML Swamp", which won't fundamentally advance the HTML solution for individually-published weblogs, while arguing against doing things in the user agents they control that could enable standards-based cross-platform Amphetadesk-level news reader clients to directly consume XML feeds. --Bill McCoy Adobe Systems Incorporated bmccoy at adobe.com -----Original Message----- From: J. Graham [mailto:jg307@hermes.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 9:30 AM To: Bill McCoy Cc: 'James Graham'; 'Henri Sivonen'; whatwg at whatwg.org Subject: RE: [whatwg] Web Forms 2.0 - what does it extend , definition of same,relation to XForms, implementation reqs. ... Lots of Web Apps are pretty dissimmilar to existing desktop apps. Weblogs, for example, are much more like a document with a little application than a typical VB app. In this case I'd argue that the HTML solution is superior in usability to something that would be produced with a typical toolkit. In this, and many other cases, there's really no need for all the additional sophistication (and complexity) of "XML-Soup" solutions.
Received on Sunday, 9 January 2005 10:18:29 UTC