[whatwg] Web Forms 2.0 - what does it extend , definition of same,
mpt at myrealbox.com
Sun Jan 9 23:36:39 PST 2005
On 10 Jan, 2005, at 12:51 PM, Jim Ley wrote:
> Current web applications use HTML almost exclusively as a rendering
> language, they're not even using the document semantics available in
> HTML, it's just script and CSS dangling off of the HTML elements you
Sure. If Web applications were semantic they'd need HTML block elements
such as <login>, <register>, <order>, and <post>. Since such elements
would be of negligible benefit to any author or UA, there's no point in
introducing their complexity (and authors can use <div> instead).
> Increasing the amount of HTML elements and form tipes out there
> doesn't change this fact, they're not going to do quite enough -
> There's the eternal problem of the declaritive, it can only go 80% of
> the way there, so you end up employing scripters who are much happier
> doing it all in script, the disciplines being different.
> If the WHAT WG's aim is to improve Web Application authoring, then
> it's scripting that needs to be helped, tweaking at the edge isn't
> going to do anything.
If the What-WG's work increases the average fraction of any particular
application that is written in HTML or XHTML rather than script and/or
arbitary XML, we do benefit. We all benefit currently, for example,
from Amazon's and IMDb's databases showing up in Google search results
-- which they wouldn't do if written entirely in script and/or FooML.
(And the application hosts benefit in turn from the search engine
> If the WHAT WG's aim is to discourage what they call street HTML,
No member of What-WG has called anything "street HTML", on the WG's
site or (except at your insistent prompting) on this mailing list.
> then removing the ambiguity and the mess of the existing HTML and
> de-facto specifications into something well grounded will be a lot
> more useful than simply introducing more stuff that'll end up in the
> variously implemented bin.
Removing ambiguity and mess of existing HTML and de-facto
specifications is done in at least the following sections (I may have
* Web Forms 2.0 section 2.3 (the "Radio buttons" part)
* Web Forms 2.0 section 2.9
* Web Forms 2.0 section 2.14
* Web Forms 2.0 section 2.15 (the "max" part)
* Web Forms 2.0 section 2.18
* Web Forms 2.0 section 4.1
* Web Forms 2.0 section 4.2
* Web Forms 2.0 section 5.2
* Web Forms 2.0 section 5.6
* Web Forms 2.0 section 7.1 (the "accept" part)
* Web Forms 2.0 section 7.2.1
* Web Forms 2.0 section 8 (its introduction)
* Web Applications 1.0 section 1.8
* Web Applications 1.0 section 2
* Web Applications 1.0 section 6.4
* Web Applications 1.0 section 7
* Web Applications 1.0 section 8.5
* Web Applications 1.0 section 10.2.
Do you have any specific suggestions for ambiguity-and-mess removal,
other than that already done in those sections?
More information about the whatwg