Fwd: Re: Compatibility between HTML, XForms, and WSDL

Below is a sample of a discussion on submit behavior in forms transactions.

For the full thread see both
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005Feb/0063.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2005Mar/thread.html#16

At first blush, it would seem that the accessibility interest favors 
the older behavior.

Moving static parameters out of the 'action' URI and into the 
intstance gains us
additional client-usable knowledge of the parameters being 
transmitted.  Of course
the server could suck them into the 'path' part of the URI but at 
least those things
that are formally being treated as parameters in a submit would be consistently
treated and somewhat modeled.

What do people think?

Al

>Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:02:01 +0000 (UTC)
>From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
>To: "Eric Prud'hommeaux" <eric@w3.org>
>Cc: www-html@w3.org, www-forms-editor@w3.org, public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org,
>         gerald@w3.org
>X-Original-To: www-html@w3.org
>Subject: Re: Compatibility between HTML, XForms, and WSDL
>X-Archived-At: 
>http://www.w3.org/mid/Pine.LNX.4.61.0503211056280.1818@dhalsim.dreamhost.com
>[...]


>On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>>
>>  Good point, that is an advantage. But what do we do about it? It
>>  violates both the HTML spec and the XForms spec. What I'd like to see is
>>  a uniform policy between HTMLs and XForms, perhaps as an errata to one
>>  or both.  What policy they choose is largely immaterial to me; they all
>>  have their strengths and weaknesses.
>>
>>  What path do you think best?
>
>The Web Forms 2 draft says that the current query value should be dropped
>and replaced by the new one, which matches current practice:
>
>    http://whatwg.org/specs/web-forms/current-work/#for-http
>
>For existing UAs I don't really think changing to anything else is an
>option, since there are sites that rely on this now. Changing it for HTML
>UAs would simply break the Web.
>
>I don't have an opinion about how it should work for new technologies like
>XForms. Since there is no legacy content in those cases, it makes sense to
>look at use cases and pick the technically best option, which is
>presumably what the XForms working group did when deciding to simply
>append -- in which case I would say appending is the better solution.
>
>--
>Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
>http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
>Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

Received on Monday, 21 March 2005 14:37:21 UTC