- From: Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer <schnitz@mozquito.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:47:35 +0200
- To: <htmlforms@damowmow.com>
- Cc: <co.wanda@apple.com>, <team-xforms-review@w3.org>, <www-forms-editor@w3.org>, <howcome@opera.com>, <w3c-forms@w3c.org>, "Steven Pemberton" <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, <w3c-archive@w3.org>, <jax@opera.no>
Ian, everyone, [snip/] > We welcome your input on our (very much work-in-progress) proposal to > extend HTML forms to provide what we believe authors are asking for, > without introducing the complexity of XForms: > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2003Sep/att-0014/hfp.html asking for input - I do have a question. You clearly say that you do not support this yet, and I wonder whether there is any latest thinking concerning real XML submission, ie. being able to control element names and even hierarchies for submission, and loading external data, presumably symmetrical in structure to submission. This one feature is what XML submission is suggesting to offer - not just a fixed structure of name / value pairs in angle brackets - and here it seems from the spec that you indeed intend to add this, but haven't come up with the definition [in this document] yet. If this is the case I'd seriously have some input. :-) This functionality affects the design quite a bit... Being able to submit structured XML data makes something like 'ref' and 'bind' in XForms - 'complexity' - come into reality, and since you have apparently not defined this functionality in your proposal, by just saying you intend to cover this feature but without describing how, comparisons with XForms - that does this - are technically inaccurate. Once you cater for this functionality you will find it to be so much closer to XForms as you now can see it. Exchange of structured XML data is a central functionality that member companies represented within and beyond the XForms WG absolutely care about today - and have therefore invested time and resources to define this functionality based on consensus, within the process - any proposal not offering this functionality cannot be seriously compared to XForms 1.0 - making any statement in terms of simplicity or implementation cost over XForms 1.0 be without basis. - Sebastian [Although I really do wish to communicate comments on the proposal, the w3c-archive mailing list designated on the document for comments or the www-forms-editor@w3.org mailing list included in this thread seem wrong for this kind of discussion, as we are e.g. turning the W3C archive into a forms working group style discussion very similar to the ones we had on w3c-forms@w3.org in the past - resulting in XForms. Communication between the individuals involved in authoring this proposal and members of the XForms WG would seem more appropriate. Joining the XForms WG mailing list would reflect the discussion in the W3C member archives at the intended place - if documentation of this discussion in the W3C archives is desired. For now, I'm happy to discuss this directly with Ian, Howcome and Jonny Axelsson of Opera - which seems more appropriate - this being a document from Opera Software - and not a deliverable of any kind based on consensus and discussion within the membership of a chartered Working Group.]
Received on Monday, 15 September 2003 05:51:51 UTC