- From: joern turner <joern.turner@web.de>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:30:27 +0200
- To: "Karandikar, Shailesh" <Shailesh.Karandikar@dendrite.com>
- Cc: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com, www-forms@w3.org
Karandikar, Karandikar, Shailesh wrote: > Andrew, > > I have to agree with you that model used by Infopath is quite useful. > > Besides legal/security issues, I would classify 'forms' market into > enterprise and internet. Standards compliance is necessary for internet > class of applications. For enterprise apps, the focus is more on business > logic, workflows, end-user conveniences, efficient manipulation of remote > and local data, multiple views of the same data, compatibility with other > applications such emails, word processing, etc. In other words, rich client > functionality is desirable. > > There is an overlap between the two, but, as it stands now, I don't believe > XForms completely qualify being a rich client (although its a smart > client!). Comparing the two, Infopath styled applications may be more > suitable for enterprises. However, the principles embodied in XForms could > be (and might have been used in Infopath) used in wider context and not only > limited to browsers. very good point. the discussion often cycles too much around the question of IE or not and browsers in general and disregards the device-independence of XForms. - i don't see any reason why an XForms Model shouldn't/couldn't be connected to rich client compoments and e.g. drive a Swing GUI. Joern Turner > > > Regards, > Shailesh Karandikar > Dendrite Intl. > > -----Original Message----- > From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2001@aol.com] > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2003 7:31 AM > To: MSeaborne@origoservices.com > Cc: www-forms@w3.org; XForms@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [XForms] Re: Will Internet Explorer support XForms > > > Mark, > > I notice that you didn't respond to my point: > > >>How does the UK insurance industry propose to handle the types of legal > > issue which >John Messing mentioned in the "How secure is XForms?" thread? > > Am I correct in assuming that your old system didn't cover that nor does the > new? Do legal requirements in the UK and USA differ? > > In a message dated 10/10/2003 11:58:48 GMT Daylight Time, > MSeaborne@origoservices.com writes: > > > > Andrew, > > >>>I think whatever the differences in functionality are between >>>InfoPath and XForms, for many organisations it all boils >>>down to who owns the underlying technology. The industry I work for >>>(UK Life Insurance) already has its own forms markup language widely >>>deployed, using both client rendering software specific to the >>>language, and server-side transforms to HTML. This is working today, >>and > > has been for several years. We operate in a world where a form > >>>may be deployed in many different ways, and by organisations other >>than > > the form originator. > > >>>Such an inter-organisational infrastructure is only viable if every >>>one adopts the same underlying forms technology. > > >>Why? > > > E.g. A form will be authored by company X, and perhaps deployed by them on > one or two of their own channels. The form will also be deployed by three > third parties for use by potentially thousands of end users, some of whom > work in organisation with a sophisticated IT infrastructure, while others > have a telephone and fax machine. The form cannot be reauthored in any way. > > > > > Um .... not being facetious ... but how do you get the XML instance data > down the phone line or in the fax? It seems to me that some form (forgive > the pun) of refactoring is going on anyway. So, in principle, why not > InfoPath too? > > > > > Key points are: > > 1) The form author does not know how the form is to be deployed at authoring > time > 2) Many organisations will host the same form, providing access to end users > with many different delivery requirments. > > > > > Ah ... but what is a "form"? It's a serious question. One the XForms WG > ducked ... shame on them! :) ... and leaves terminology in a flakey state. > > If you have a set of form controls on an electronic XForms form and have a > set of similar looking (but non-functioning) widgets on a paper form is that > the "same form"? Or not? It isn't obvious to me. Is the paper form an XForms > form? > > I must make a point of seeing how T V Raman handles the issue of "what is a > form?" in his book as I continue reading it. I guess the overview format > allows avoidance of practical little issues like that. "Form" doesn't make > it in the index. > > > > It turned out to be cheaper and more practical to produce our own forms > markup language than to leave all form generators and users to do their own > thing. > > >>>XForms is only an option because it is an open standard, InfoPath, >>>and other competing forms technologies, are not because they are >>>proprietary. It really is that simple. > > >>Are you sure? > > > Yes. > > > > I am not convinced yet. :) > > > > > >>Just curious, but how is a server to tell the difference between an >>XML instance document submitted by InfoPath and one submitted from an >>XForms client? > > > For us XForms addresses forms/business rules deployment across organisations > that have contractually regulated relationships. > > > > OK. But that doesn't answer my question. > > > > > >>I haven't seen the Adobe XML/PDF technology yet but if it submits an >>identical XML instance document why should that automatically fail to >meet > > your needs? > > Hopefully that should be clear from comments above. > > > > > No. It isn't clear to me. > > > > >>Does your industry's application require that the visible "form" of >>the form is common? Or that the XML data submitted is? > > > Both or either depending on circumstances. > > > > So if InfoPath could submit identical to XForms that would be ok in some > circumstances? > > Then there is the matter of the business rules underlying a form. > > > > > > > What do you mean by business rules in this context? > > I am challenging your proposition of this type of decision being simple and > the assertion that "standards" are "all there is to it". I simply am not > convinced that it is "that simple". > > The assessment of your needs is yours and the decision on a chosen solution > likewise. I do find it difficult to see how this is as simple as you > indicate. > > Andrew Watt > > > > ********************************************************************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify > the system manager. > > ********************************************************************** > >
Received on Friday, 10 October 2003 08:29:43 UTC