IBM and XForms

> Don't expect everything that IBM does to be open
> source straight away! 

  Well, I'm not an open-source fanatic. I don't care
if IBM open-sources its rich browser. My point is that
they don't even built one because a) they don't want
to escalate the "war" with Microsoft b) they don't
want to ditch Lotus Notes c) they have an army of
consultants to feed and so on.

> Since one of the authors of the spec is from IBM,
> and we have in production several real world 
> engagements (in Global Services, not 
> Software Group) based on the CR spec (and earlier).

  I guess that says it all about IBM's approach. Guess
how interested are consultants in simplicity? Who is
going to need them if someone cleans up the mess so
that a seven year old schoolgirl can built forms using
XML?

  I hope you see my point that hoping for salvation
from multi nationals like IBM, Adobe and so is an
illusion. If you want to make XML forms a reality, you
need to help startups that don't come prepacked with
massive conflict of interests.

> In my opinion, the server side component is actually

> more important than having 
> a browser that can render an XForm natively, since
> the point of XML-out is 
> integration with other systems, which requires a
> server side 
> implementation of some of the functionality. 

  Well, just because that's where IBM makes it money,
doesn't mean that it's true for everyone.

> The server components can 
> also transcode the XForm for what ever user-agent
> requires access to the form.

  Transcode, User-agent. Why not use plain-english?
How about browser? How about reformat?

  - Gerald


______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

Received on Friday, 11 April 2003 13:19:35 UTC