[whatwg] rel/rev for <form> ?
jasper at album.co.nz
Sun Nov 6 18:10:44 PST 2005
On Sun, 2005-11-06 at 15:30 -0800, Mike Dierken wrote:
> > Having rel/rev for a form element is logical. Hyperlink and
> > form are inherently related in that both are used to specify
> > protocol of communication. So, if hyperlink can have rel/rev,
> > why not form?
> It could, sure. But the original request was to define the purpose of the
> URI in the action attribute, not the relatioship between the action URI and
> the <form> element, so rel/rev was overkill & possibly inappropriate.
> The meaning of a tag matching "html/body/form[@action]" is already
> documented - it defines the structure of a document acceptable by the
> resource identified by the action attribute. Defining the meaning of the
> document is probably more worthwhile, rather than the meaning of the
> resource that would accept that document.
> It would be cool to have the browser support POSTing some content type more
> sophisticated than www-url-encoded, like XML (no flames please).
> I honestly have no idea if the WHAT-WG is working on that, or some other
> group, or what.
WHATWG: Web Forms 2.0
both define XML submission content-types.
e: jasper at album.co.nz
p: 0800 4 ALBUM (0800 425 286) or +64 21 232 3303
a: PO Box 579, Christchurch 8015, New Zealand
More information about the whatwg