W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-forms-editor@w3.org > January 2002

Re: GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms]

From: Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:26:39 -0800
Message-ID: <3C4F2A8F.43EC240D@prescod.net>
To: "David E. Cleary" <davec@progress.com>
CC: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, www-forms-editor@w3.org, www-tag@w3.org
"David E. Cleary" wrote:
> Maybe this is all a misunderstanding. You can certainly use GET to get an
> XForms document or an XHTML document that has XForms embedded into it.

That's not the issue. This URL was generated with a form that does GET:


How would I generate that URL in a post-Form-GET world?

> > If XForms are only for sending XML data from a client to a server then
> > we'll have to go back and change the requirements document and  which
> > says that they are supposed to be a replacement for HTML forms.
> XForms 1.0 supports GET and can replace HTML forms. However, future versions
> of XForms should not be tied to this requirement.

Future versions of XForms should not work well with HTTP? Future
versions of XForms should not uphold the Web architecture?

> > I would a little bit annoyed if this were the choice because it would
> > mean that the Web would have to support two different form widget sets,
> > not just for a long time, but forever.
> You lost me there. XForms does define its own form widget set, but can also
> be bound to XHTML form widgets as well as other form widget sets. Supporting
> form submission with GET forever is orthogonal to that issue.

How is it orthogonal? XHTML forms can't use XForms widgets, AFAIK. So if
XForms doesn't support GET then people will have to keep using XHTML
forms and thus XHTML widgets to get the GET behaviour that is a
*critical part of the way the web works*.

 Paul Prescod
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 16:28:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:38:05 UTC