- From: Goodrich, Christopher Michael <cmgoodr@sandia.gov>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:46:50 -0700
- To: "Eric S. Fisher" <efisher@fsystems.com>, www-forms@w3.org
I wish to comment about this. I do want to preface this by saying that I support your stand on xforms Eric, but I want to point something out that you may have missed: <begin snip> ...If this were true, Macromedia Flash, Real Player and Apple QuickTime would also be limited this way -- and I have never heard users of any of these technologies complain because they had to download a plug-in.... <end snip> I would assume then that you have little customer help desk experience. I've been doing a help desk for about 8 years, and I can tell you that the grumbles are there. Not only from the customer, but from the support people as well. Macromedia Flash is difficult to work with, QuickTime breaks IE very easily, and Real Player is simply too proprietary to work with easily. I for one do not like any of these 'plug-ins' and definitely want to see xforms fully integrated into the browser. I don't see a reason why they shouldn't, especially since xml is already being integrated into the major browsers. Although I haven't read the article, I can already assume that it is highly biased and probably doesn't compare xforms favorably if they include these other 'plug-ins' as examples. To me, this would reflect negatively on xforms. I will read the article now before I speak too far out of turn. Thank you, Christopher M Goodrich A+ Corporate Computing Help Desk Sandia National Laboratories Science Applications International Corporation cmgoodr@sandia.gov (505) 284-4797 -----Original Message----- From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Eric S. Fisher Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:50 AM To: www-forms@w3.org Subject: Fwd: XForms vs. Web Forms I just read this article (all five Web pages) and cannot conclude from it that Web Forms 2.0 is the "winner." I thought the article was a balanced comparison with fair reporting of the real issues confronting XForms acceptance. As I said in my earlier post, they are two different specs: Web Forms is backward-looking and more or less automatically compatible with the current generation of browsers. XForms is forward-looking and is more concerned with being an open and compatible player in the XML based Web services arena than in being compatible with earlier technologies. In order to have XForms capability in current browsers, you have to download a plug-in, just like Macromedia Flash, Real Player and Apple QuickTime, to name just three. I see no reason at all to consider XForms a dead end just because it is not supported natively in current browsers. If this were true, Macromedia Flash, Real Player and Apple QuickTime would also be limited this way -- and I have never heard users of any of these technologies complain because they had to download a plug-in. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are a lot of people, most especially Microsoft, that would like to see the XForms effort fail. Truly open standards are fundamently incompatible with lock-in strategies of any sort. XForms opens the door to a number of truly astounding applications not invented yet, and its openness provides the user and developer communities with options for innovation and competition that would be unavailable otherwise. We can go down both development paths without losing any momentum on either. That's the glory of the Internet. Eric S. Fisher ------- Forwarded message ------- From: "Peter Bruhn Andersen" <bruhn.andersen@get2net.dk> To: www-forms@w3.org Subject: XForms vs. Web Forms Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 10:03:36 +0100 I've just seen this article http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5581106.html It 'compares' XForms to the Web Forms 2.0 specification and concludes that Web Forms is the winner. I have no knowledge about the Web Forms specification so I would like to hear what the group thinks about the article. And perhaps more to the point: Should we keep using XForms or should we switch to Web Forms? Regards, Peter -- Important Note: This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform me immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2005 16:47:40 UTC