- From: James P. Salsman <bovik@best.com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:55:23 -0800 (PST)
- To: Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl
- Cc: ietf@ietf.org, www-html@w3.org
Dear Dr. Pemberton, Thank you for your message. I hope this one gets through. Some of my email to W3C lists (e.g., www-forms) has not appeared in the archives. You state that there are comments regarding how the device upload proposal can be improved. Please publish them, with my replies to them. My understanding is that there are no unresolved issues. > for instance for device independence The device upload proposal -- http://www.bovik.org/device-upload.html is the epitome of device independence -- it has an extensible "device" attribute, after all. This line of argument is disingenuous, and I hope it is not representative of the official position of the W3C. Please let me know. > The WG is currently working on revised forms, and any device upload > would be in the context of that work. You refer to the extensive re-design of forms using XML, which will require substantial replacement of both client and server software. I do not wish my work to be associated with that effort. First, the device upload proposal requires only changes in web clients, not CGI script processing software or other server software. More importantly, the "XForms" work is currently scheduled for completion in the forth quarter. Why should people on non-wintel platforms wait that long for a way to record audio? As you know, I participated in the XForms work, but I think it would be a mistake for me to resume participation. Please accept the device upload submission from General Magic as a Working Draft, on Recommendation track. Cheers, James Salsman
Received on Monday, 28 February 2000 12:56:27 UTC