- From: Kurt Cagle <kurt@kurtcagle.net>
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 13:19:30 -0800
- To: <svg-developers@yahoogroups.com>
- Cc: <www-svg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <00d401c290da$9d15b130$1524fc0a@kcagle>
I'd second the call on this. Either a Note or a Working Draft on SVG/XForms integration as a separate document would help to qualify what the exact thinking is wrt XForms integration, and would make it possible to get feedback from the SVG community in terms of working implementations for similar functionality. Indeed, I wonder to a certain extent whether the XForms integration should not be handled as a separate namespace outside of the SVG namespace itself.
-- Kurt Cagle
----- Original Message -----
From: AndrewWatt2001@aol.com
To: www-svg@w3.org ; svg-developers@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 9:00 AM
Subject: [svg-developers] SVG and XForms - Status Report Please
I think it would be good if the SVG WG makes public what analysis they have
made of the present XForms proposal and how good a fit (or not) they deem it
to be for modularization with SVG.
I ask partly because there are signs in the XForms Candidate Recommendation
that at least some parts of the specification have been created with XHTML
2.0 particularly in mind. I think it is therefore important that the SVG
community be reassured that no decisions are being taken which makes
implementation of XForms with SVG unnecessarily difficult.
This issue arises whether or not one believes that XHTML 2.0 has a future.
Andrew Watt
"XHTML 2.0 - the W3C leading the Web to its full potential ... to implement
yesterday's technology tomorrow"
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
-----
To unsubscribe send a message to: svg-developers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
-or-
visit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svg-developers and click "edit my membership"
----
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 16:20:46 UTC