The idea that Web Forms 2.0 requires JavaScript is a fallacy.
JavaScript may be used to provide legacy support in the client (browser). However, Web Forms 2.0 is intended for implementation by browser manufacturers. Because it is based on existing HTML forms technology it is potentially implemented quite quickly. No Web Forms 2.0 application should ever assume that the browser supports WF2. There should always be proper validation for legacy browsers. This is being a good web-developer anyway.
And Web Forms 2.0 seems like a mess; reliance on JavaScript is a no-no.
JavaScript may be used to provide legacy support in the client (browser). However, Web Forms 2.0 is intended for implementation by browser manufacturers. Because it is based on existing HTML forms technology it is potentially implemented quite quickly. No Web Forms 2.0 site should ever assume that the client supports WF2 so there should always be proper validation for legacy browsers. This is being a good web-master anyway.
This is not a war. Many of the WHAT-WG members are also members of the W3C.
The Web Forms 2.0 specification is an extension of the existing (and antiquated) HTML Forms specification. It adds some new elements and attributes some of which are alarming omissions from the original spec. Things like standardised date and number input controls will be a boon to web developers. XForms is a quite different technology. And it may be some time before it has the penetration to be a mainstream development tool. In the meantime, Web Forms 2.0, by extending existing HTML forms functionality gives developers a familiar framework to build on.
If you are looking for any political angle then notice that Microsoft are not represented in the members list. [I can assure you that they were invited.] The WHATWG are about web applications. We need a standardised extension to HTML to stave off the immediate threat of XAML. Web Forms 2.0 and the upcoming Web Apps 1.0 are meant to do just that.
There are two halves to the IT business - innovation and support. If you innovate and are successful then you are going to have to do some support. The more successful products you have the more support you need.
Any slashdotter who has worked on a successful software project will recognise the following scenario:
You and a few other guys hack together a cool prototype. Cool prototype becomes cool product. Cool product becomes department of cool people. Marketing, sales, 1st line support etc. But your job changes too. You're job is no longer developing cool prototypes. You are now a crucial technical liaison for a major software product. Your life has changed. You don't think of how to improve your original work. You want the phone to stop ringing - besides you've got to interview a guy for a maintenance role. Your life has changed.
That has happened to everyone that was at the heart of Microsoft. Their life has changed. They are now maintaining an empire not building it. To be honest, global capitalism is far too complex to predict what will happen to them. Hopefully, they will adapt to their new role maintaining what they have created. Innovation they should leave to smaller hungrier beasts.
thanks to all those who have offered to mirror/host my site. i'm currently working on a solution so i should be back up again soon.
thanks to Asheesh Laroia there is now a temporary mirror here:
http://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~alaroia1/dean/
please note: only the html test files work on this mirror.
thanks again.
dean edwards
Can someone temporarily host my site?
some of it is php4. is that ok?
mail me at dean@edwards.name and cc 9jack9@msn.com. i can chat on the msn account if necessary.
thanks.
dean edwards
Slashdot Mirror
Seeing as how you guys have trashed my site again. Here's a mirror of my article "How To Disable GreaseMonkey On Your Web Site": http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~9jack9/ungreased.h tml
Cheers mate! Thanks for /.ing my site.
The idea that Web Forms 2.0 requires JavaScript is a fallacy.
JavaScript may be used to provide legacy support in the client (browser). However, Web Forms 2.0 is intended for implementation by browser manufacturers. Because it is based on existing HTML forms technology it is potentially implemented quite quickly. No Web Forms 2.0 application should ever assume that the browser supports WF2. There should always be proper validation for legacy browsers. This is being a good web-developer anyway.
JavaScript may be used to provide legacy support in the client (browser). However, Web Forms 2.0 is intended for implementation by browser manufacturers. Because it is based on existing HTML forms technology it is potentially implemented quite quickly. No Web Forms 2.0 site should ever assume that the client supports WF2 so there should always be proper validation for legacy browsers. This is being a good web-master anyway.
This is not a war. Many of the WHAT-WG members are also members of the W3C.
The Web Forms 2.0 specification is an extension of the existing (and antiquated) HTML Forms specification. It adds some new elements and attributes some of which are alarming omissions from the original spec. Things like standardised date and number input controls will be a boon to web developers. XForms is a quite different technology. And it may be some time before it has the penetration to be a mainstream development tool. In the meantime, Web Forms 2.0, by extending existing HTML forms functionality gives developers a familiar framework to build on.
If you are looking for any political angle then notice that Microsoft are not represented in the members list. [I can assure you that they were invited.] The WHATWG are about web applications. We need a standardised extension to HTML to stave off the immediate threat of XAML. Web Forms 2.0 and the upcoming Web Apps 1.0 are meant to do just that.
There are two halves to the IT business - innovation and support. If you innovate and are successful then you are going to have to do some support. The more successful products you have the more support you need.
Any slashdotter who has worked on a successful software project will recognise the following scenario:
You and a few other guys hack together a cool prototype. Cool prototype becomes cool product. Cool product becomes department of cool people. Marketing, sales, 1st line support etc. But your job changes too. You're job is no longer developing cool prototypes. You are now a crucial technical liaison for a major software product. Your life has changed. You don't think of how to improve your original work. You want the phone to stop ringing - besides you've got to interview a guy for a maintenance role. Your life has changed.
That has happened to everyone that was at the heart of Microsoft. Their life has changed. They are now maintaining an empire not building it. To be honest, global capitalism is far too complex to predict what will happen to them. Hopefully, they will adapt to their new role maintaining what they have created. Innovation they should leave to smaller hungrier beasts.
// end ramble
damn. now i have to think of a new name...
Casey. you need to amend the css files to point at behvior files (htc) or none of the examples will work. -dean
http://edwards.furhome.net/IE7/
thanks anyway Caseyi love your comment. you really understand what i've done. -dean edwards
thanks to Lizard for this mirror:
http://edwards.furhome.net/
all html and xml examples should now work.
thanks again for all the offers for mirrors i've had.
dean edwardsI've done this too: http://dean.edwards.name/moz-behaviors/ (when my site is back up!)
thanks to all those who have offered to mirror/host my site. i'm currently working on a solution so i should be back up again soon. thanks to Asheesh Laroia there is now a temporary mirror here: http://jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu/~alaroia1/dean/ please note: only the html test files work on this mirror. thanks again. dean edwards
Can someone temporarily host my site? some of it is php4. is that ok? mail me at dean@edwards.name and cc 9jack9@msn.com. i can chat on the msn account if necessary. thanks. dean edwards