[AccessD] Re: xform design tools

MartyConnelly martyconnelly at shaw.ca
Fri Feb 20 16:09:48 CST 2004


I didn't know anyone had created a browser addin yet. Interesting was 
waiting for that
rather than using old XSL-FO

Gustav Brock wrote:

>Hi those of you interested in XForms.
>
>I noted these comments and useful links on the present status of
>XForms which might be of interest for some of you.
>I'm quoting as the letter is not on-line yet.
>
><quote>
>
>The SitePoint TECH TIMES #83                   Copyright (c) 2004
>February 18th, 2004                                PLEASE FORWARD
>
>EDITORIAL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>THE STATE OF XFORMS
>
>Back in the Tech Times #53 [1], I introduced XForms as the
>latest candidate recommendation to come out of the W3C. I
>explained the advantages it had over HTML forms, and even showed
>a simple example of how XForms work. 
>
>At the time, the media buzz surrounding XForms came from the
>fact that Microsoft was building something called XDocs into its
>upcoming Office 2003 software. Many attributed Microsoft's
>refusal to endorse XForms to similarities that the
>recommendation bore to XDocs.
>
>Over a year later, Office 2003 has been released, XDocs is now
>called InfoPath [2], XForms has become a full-fledged W3C 
>recommendation [3], and the fine folks at x-port.net have just
>released formsPlayer 1.0 [4], a free plug-in for Internet
>Explorer that fully complies with the XForms standard.
>
>So why aren't we seeing XForms springing up all over the Web?
>After all, the most popular Web browser in the world now
>supports them with a free plug-in!
>
>Due to the stagnation of Internet Explorer [5], all the
>ultra-keen Web developers who would normally jump on a
>technology like this have moved to Mozilla [6] (and Firefox [7])
>as their development platform of choice. To put it bluntly,
>no one really cares what Internet Explorer can do now, because
>there is so much that it can't do (like properly support CSS2
>[8]).
>
>So, the question is, what are the other browser makers doing
>about XForms?
>
>Mozilla is tracking requests for XForms support and volunteers
>interested in working on it in bug 97806 [9]. The comments on
>this bug, which dates back to the days when XForms was a working
>draft, make interesting reading. There are many opinions on why
>XForms may or may not be worthy of consideration for inclusion
>in Mozilla, but the status quo is that it remains a relatively
>low-priority feature request in need of good developers, despite
>having nearly 500 votes from community members.
>
>Apple (whose Safari browser has become a serious consideration
>for developers) and Opera issued a combined statement [10] last
>September in response to XForms becoming a proposed
>recommendation. In it, they outlined a list of "substantial
>issues" in the standard that they felt made XForms inappropriate
>as a replacement for HTML forms. When pressed, they admitted
>[11] that XForms was probably worthy as a platform for advanced
>forms development, as long as HTML forms remained as the
>mainstream choice in XHTML 2.0.
>
>So why all this negative sentiment towards XForms? Is it really
>so flawed?
>
>Like any new technology, XForms has a rough spot or two, but the
>productivity it offers to developers cannot be denied. Yet,
>while XForms itself isn't all that complex, it relies on a host
>of technologies that are fairly complex, and are not widely
>implemented in today's browsers. Quoting from Apple and Opera's
>statement,
>
>"XForms has too many dependencies. In addition to XForms itself,
>an XForms implementation needs to support XML with namespaces,
>XML Schema, XPath, XML Events, DOM Events, DOM Core, CSS, a
>stylesheet linking technology (e.g. the XML Stylesheet PI), and
>a host language (e.g. XHTML or SVG). In particular, its
>dependency on XML Schema is of great concern to us."
>
>The Mozilla bug discussion suggests that XML Schema [12]
>support is not strictly necessary for a basic implementation of
>XForms, but XML Events [13] is a definite piece of the puzzle
>that has yet to be built into Mozilla. Meanwhile, browsers like
>Opera and Safari are even further behind the curve.
>
>>From what I can tell, XForms has the dubious distinction of
>being one of the first implementations of a number of XML
>technolgies with mass appeal to Web developers. Though well
>thought out, none of these technologies has had a compelling
>reason to be buit into a Web browser before, and now, all of a
>sudden, they would all have to be built at once in order to
>support XForms.
>
>Even with a free, fully compliant plug-in for Internet Explorer,
>XForms has some serious hurdles to overcome before developers
>can consider it as a serious tool for general Web development.
>If you want to pitch in, I would definitely encourage you to
>contribute your services to the Mozilla project, but it will
>take some smart brains and a lot of work to bring XForms into
>the spotlight.
>
>[1] <http://www.sitepoint.com/newsletter/viewissue.php?id=3&issue=53>
>[2] <http://office.microsoft.com/infopath/>
>[3] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/>
>[4] <http://www.formsplayer.com/>
>[5] <http://www.sitepoint.com/newsletter/viewissue.php?id=3&issue=68#5>
>[6] <http://www.mozilla.org/>
>[7] <http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/>
>[8] <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/>
>[9] <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97806>
>[10] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2003Sep/0006.html>
>[11] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms-editor/2003Sep/0017.html>
>[12] <http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema>
>[13] <http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-events/>
>
>The Archives are located at:
>http://www.sitepoint.com/newsletter/archives.php
>
></quote>
>
>/gustav
>
>
>  
>
>>Strangely, just this morning I received this link from Novell:
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>http://developer.novell.com/research/appnotes/2003/septembe/04/a0309046.htm#1849119
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>Notice the headline and link
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>  The Novell XForms Technology Preview (NXTP)
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>I have, however, no idea of the cost for this tool.
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
>>/gustav
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>
>>>Date: 2003-10-08 03:58
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>I saw both of you had posted ?'s asking about the existence of any xforms design tools at the w3c-forms site.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>Have either of you found any?
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>I am exploring QLink and Liquid Office, both of which seem to be much more than xforms, same story with holosofx (now ibm)
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>Appreciate any help.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>>Gene McKenna
>>>      
>>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>  
>

-- 
Marty Connelly
Victoria, B.C.
Canada






More information about the AccessD mailing list