- From: Jason Eacott <jeacott@hardlight.com.au>
- Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:03:39 +0930
- To: Joern Turner <joern.turner@web.de>
- Cc: www-forms@w3.org
Thanks Joern, I think you have made my point far better than I did. Jason. > I agree with you both Jason and Eric ;) > > It simply depends on your viewpoint. But there are differences which > should be maybe pointed out to push all these discussions about 'AJAX > versus XFORMS' forward to a more constructive level and see what they > can profit from each other (sorry for repeating you here, Eric). > > Jason is IMO right to say that they are very different in one way. AJAX > concentrates on the 'friendlier interface' and improved interactivity > alone and does not provide a complete architecture for handling user > dialogs as XForms does. Even if some more advanced AJAX samples directly > connect datasources on the backend and do some automatic updating they > do so in a completely custom (and non-standard) way. In that respect > AJAX is more a technique than a technology. > > XForms on the other hand provides a clear model with separation of > model, instance and UI in a MVC fashion, provides a clear processing > model that guarantees consistency, an advanced dependency tracking and > calculation model, nearly endless validation capability, strong > data-typing, an event-model and an abstract UI definition. - well, sorry > if i left out details but isn't that a bit more than simple AJAX has to > offer? > > Even if there are similarities in goals from an end users perspective > AJAX and XForms are very different from an architectural or developers > view. It's my personal belief that AJAX and XForms go very well together > in these 'hybrid' implementations as Eric called them and can profit > from each other in large dimensions. AJAX and XForms integrated would > free the page developer from lots of custom script coding *and* get all > the advantages of XForms processing while server-side XForms processors > will be able to become much more accessible, friendly and interactive. - > And all this by using a standard webbrowser without any installations. A > bright perspective for server-side or hybrid XForms. > > > > > As Mark said, it is up to us in the XForms community to evangelize and > > tell people that XForms is a reality today, that it does much of what > > Ajax does, and that it is likely to be much more productive than bare > > metal Ajax. We should also not neglect the "cool" factor: we should > > work on telling people that XForms is really cool for their web apps, > > not just a boring tool for enterprise data entry. > Plain agree. More and more elaborated samples are needed and they also > shouldn't leave the 'coolness factor' aside to compete in users eye with > some of todays' AJAX samples but also emphasize the specific strength of > XForms. > > At Chibacon we also currently work on our own AJAX interface to our > XForms processor. A demo will be made publish during November and > hopefully show some non-trivial examples and we'll put some extra effort > in explanations of features. We hope we can show a complete real-world, > AJAX-enabled and non-trivial XForms 'application' for configuring > network appliances. > > just my 0.02 € > > Joern > > > > My personal opinion is that yes, the WG is going way too slowly, which > > is unfortunately typical of much at W3C. But the 1.0 spec has been out > > for two years now, and what developers really need is not a spec, but > > good implementations which are as interoperable as possible, and good > > examples. Several implementations are already out there or coming > > soon. XForms support in Mozilla is coming up. More implementations > > will create demand for an improved and richer XForms > > specification. But implementations and good examples are essential. > > > > Based on a recent survey, many people code Ajax by hand and do not yet > > use libraries much, see: > > > > http://www.surveymonkey.com/DisplaySummary.asp?SID=1427046&U=142704624114 > > > > The bottom line is that consolidation in the Ajax world has not > > happened at all, so XForms has an excellent opportunity. In short I > > think that the future of XForms is going to be bright if the current > > XForms community plays well. > > > > -Erik > > > > PS: I refer you to this email for information about OPS: > > > > http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200508/msg00231.html > > > > > > -- Jason Eacott Hardlight Interactive http://www.hardlight.com.au Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have.
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2005 23:44:34 UTC