XForms Becomes Proposed Recommendation 247
leighklotz writes "The W3C has announced that XForms is now a Proposed Recommendation, after certification of one full implementation (open
source Java XSmiles from Finland) and two more implementations of each feature (the Internet
Explorer plug-in FormsPlayer
and the Java standalone Novell
xPlorer). XForms is the next generation of forms for the Web, and uses an
XML-based three-layer model: data model, data, and user interface.
XForms uses CSS for device independencence and is designed for
integration into XHTML 2,
SVG, and other XML-based markup
languages. A host of other implementations
are available or in progress, but my pick for most interesting is DENG, which is an
XForms to Flash compiler written in Flash. DENG supports
XForms, SVG, RSS, XHTML, and CSS. XForms is in consideration for other standards as diverse as Universal
Remote Controls and the UK
Government Interoperability Framework, and was developed with the
participation of IBM, Oracle, Xerox, Adobe, Novell, SAP, Cardiff,
PureEdge, and a host of other companies,
universities, and invididuals."
Thank god. (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe they think if they make forms complex enough, and break enough browsers, the cheap labor in India won't take their jobs?
How will this change things? (Score:2, Interesting)
-Erwos
Browsers..? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Browsers..? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:an open letter to w3c (Score:4, Interesting)
XML-based Web services, connecting to your Application Server layer, which communicates with the Enterprise Application Integration Messaging/Queuing Layers, JDBC abstraction layers, CORBA, DCOM, interpreted/JIT-compiled ByteCode, plus all the TCP/IP messaging it all runs on across the eight servers.
Just one simple question: (Score:3, Interesting)
(Combo boxes are those in which you can both enter a text and choose from a list - for example the "location" bar in most browsers.)
Re:an open letter to w3c (Score:2, Interesting)
The idea is you can write a document once, then you can run it through one doohicky and make a PDF that looks nice for printing, run it through another doohicky and make a website that looks nice (and isn't linear like the printed version), run it through a special doohicky and it makes a web site that works for blind people, etc...
Basically, once you write the content, you never have to worry about formatting, that's not your concern.
A side effect is that the semantic markup makes it really easy to do things like smart search engines, that know that "python" could either mean a snake or a programming language, and let you clearly specify which you mean.
We don't need no backwards compatibility (Score:5, Interesting)
It Should (Score:3, Interesting)
One of the biggest problems with running Linux for non-geeks is configuration. Every app has its own .appnamerc or appname.conf with its own peculiar syntax and options. Now that we have a standard for filling out forms, we can build the infrastructure for a single front end to them all.
So, for each *rc or *conf file, we need an XForms Model that describes the form and how to validate it, and an X-forms-aware UA like Mozilla [mozilla.org] (but you can't get there from here!), or perhaps on the server side through Apache and Cocoon's XMLForm [apache.org] to handle the work of getting the input. XForms can become the glue that holds Linux together.When users can right-click on something, select Properties from the menu, and configure it in a consistent interface, one of the biggest impediments to Linux use by non-techies will be removed.
Re:Hmmmm..... InfoPath anyone? (Score:2, Interesting)
Lets say I'm building a web based app. to allow users to create/update/delete records. I create a database table to store these records in. I use SQL to do this. I write documentation detailing the table layout, field types and sizes.
I write some script on the web server to perform the SQL create/update/delete and to squirt suitable (X)HTML at the user. I also have to include data validation here, which involves knowledge of the database layout... no problem, I've got my documentation!
Oh, and I want to include some validation at the client end so the user doesn't have to wait for the round-trip to be told that they've missed some information or something. So thats a little JavaScript, again involving knowledge of the DB layout.
And bingo! Its done.
But then the boss says they want to add some extra fields to the "record", so I've now got to:
- Modify the database schema
- Update my documentaiton
- Modify the web server script to create/update/delete the new field *AND* validate it!
- Modify the HTML to include the new field
- Modify the client JavaScript validation
Its a lot of maintenance work, and a lot of places for things not to work right. Lots of potential for errors/SQL injection vunerabilities.Now just with that lot, you could use XSchema to describe the data record *once* and use that to update the database, update the documentation (okay, generate docs from the XSchema) and build server and client side form validation.
You'd then just be left with updating the HTML to include the extra field.
But beyond that I imagine there should be a way to submit the form directly to the database server maybe? Certainly, the amount of coding required at the web server should at least be negligable - and completely automatable.
Which I'd guess is what MS InfoPath [microsoft.com] is all about?
A product that allows you to describe data *once* and easily, visually, build forms would make it childs play for an unskilled, non-programmer type to create database applications.
I do hope that Mozilla/OpenOffice/mySQL or someone does some joined up thinking with all this, because otherwise Microsoft *might* be about to roll out a complete end-to-end solution based on their own proprietary crap!
NOTE - This is pure speculation as I don't know much about InfoPath. It *might* be fully open standards based!! However, if it isn't, then it will still be a compelling product, and more worryingly, a product that would very much tie an organisation into MS software.
Before you mock Xforms... (Score:3, Interesting)
So, you decide. WinForms, on IE with
we NEED something (Score:2, Interesting)
I have to disagree. There is a serious lack of an HTTP-friendly standard for GUI business forms. The current standards are optimized for e-brochures, not business forms. While it can possibly be bent screaming and fighting into an almost-acceptable business form under certain vendor's browsers, one gets charley horses doing such. HTML+JavaScript+DOM is nasty for non-trivial forms.
We need a standard purposely targeted for business forms. (I even proposed one of my own because I fealt something was needed. See my other reply.)
However, this proposal does look a bit overdone.
Re:WTF? That name is already taken, try again. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Thank god. (Score:5, Interesting)
My take on this: if you can validate on the client side, it saves you from having fancy (and tedious to write) code on the server side which repopulates the HTML page and allows the user to fix the problem. You still check for invalid data on the server side, but error messages can be curt and no repopulating forms BS.
All depends on what kind of site you're designing, of course.
Re:This yanks the rug out from under Office 2003! (Score:3, Interesting)
XML is supposed to be interoperable
Microsoft has taken the stance that small companies aren't likely to make use of custom-defined schemas because an IT staff skilled in XML and familiar with the XSD specification is needed to write one ... I will admit that schemas are a PITA to define and write, but there are industry-specific schemas already out there, and the tools to make writing them easier are there too. Microsoft's concern for the small business is just an excuse to sell crippleware and licence upgrades.
http://www.smallbusinesscomputing.com/biztools/a rticle.php/2194131
Bzzt -- try again. InfoPath falls short. (Score:1, Interesting)
Consider that InfoPath only works with IE/Outlook, and can only be served from IIS+Front Page Extensions.
It's actually based on IE 6, plus lots of undocumented extensions. It is nearly impossible to programatically create InfoPath forms. The only way to create InfoPath documents to do drag-n-drop exercises.
It's purely a client-side solution, so unless you trust that 12-year-old script kiddies aren't telnetting into your server, you'll need to re-write all of the validations for the server.
All InfoPath layout is table based--the kind of thing that accessibility guides consider the cardinal sin. Non-visual users will have a terrible time navigating through InfoPath forms.
Severe platform lock-in: InfoPath only runs where IE 6 runs. No
Finally, It only comes with the most expensive (subscription-based) version of Microsoft Office. The full product is required to either design, or fill forms. No support for ordinary browsers.
I'd say XForms looks pretty good on multiple levels...