GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms]

On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 17:21, Mark Baker wrote:
> Since somebody else has brought up XForms, I'd like to point out the
> following section (as discovered by Paul Prescod);
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/slice4.html#evt-submit
> 
> In particular,
> 
>   The HTTP "get" protocol is deprecated for use in form submission.
>   Form authors should use "post" for greater compatibility.

Just on the basis of what I can see here, that looks pretty bad,
to me...

> I don't have an issue with XForms not supporting GET (though once it's
> there, I wonder why you'd want to get rid of it), but I do have an
> issue if it's deprecating GET *and* claiming to be able to replace
> HTML forms;
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/0092.html
> 
> The thread in which this is still being discussed is;
> 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/thread.html#81

I see that XForms 1.0 is in last call...
  http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xforms-20020118/
comments are due 22 February 2002; reviewing the archive
of comments submitted to the feedback address, I don't
see this in there.

With apologies for the lateness of this comment (I should
have looked at XForms long ago...), I'm afraid
I must say I find this aspect of the design unacceptable,
on the grounds that...

  "In HTTP, anything which does not have side-effects must use GET"
	-- http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#state

I agree with Paul Prescod's argument in, e.g.,
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/0119.html

I'm not speaking for the TAG; we haven't discussed it
as a group yet.

> FWIW, I don't think this requires TAG attention yet, but if any of the
> TAG members are looking at XForms anyhow ...
> 
> MB

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 10:41:27 UTC