- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 14:41:31 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, Jep Castelein wrote: > > It's probably too early to discuss implementation in detail, but it > seems to me that the specs are biased towards native browser > implementations. How does the list think about implementations in a > JavaScript library? It's my personal belief that it should be possible > to implement the entire Web Forms spec in a 30-40Kb JavaScript library, > of course without the DOM interface extensions. This would also avoid > JavaScript spaghetti, because it's all neatly packaged in a JavaScript > library that integrates seamlessly with existing HTML pages and existing > browser implementations (including IE) > > Is the Web Forms 2.0 specification intended to support this type of > implementation, or is it focused purely on native browser > implementations? Web Forms 2.0 is not written with a pure JS implementation in mind, but if there are small changes that could be made to the spec today to make doing such an implementation easier, let me know. The primary target for WF2 and WA1 is native implementations and XBL- and HTC- based implementations. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 10 January 2005 06:41:31 UTC