Matthew,
I'm afraid you were misinformed.
At http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2003Oct/0028 you can
see a report I made on 2003 October in which I first encountered this
work. I was looking for XForms Basic, the name of a Working Draft
from the W3C Forms Working group, and found
that
we've seen here.
And again, as Ian asked, please stop bringing up these questions again
and again, and I'll be able to stop bringing up the answers.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Hickson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 10:26 AM
To: Klotz, Leigh
Cc: Matthew
Uh huh, a last call comment posted 3 years after the group was formed,
when Opera, a W3C member, had not participated in the development of
charter, requirements, working draft, candidate recommendation, or
proposed recommendation. Opera certainly has its own business
interests to protect, and I
some commonality, and leave the political theatre of September 2003
to rest.
-Original Message-
From: James Graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 10:01 AM
To: Klotz, Leigh
Cc: Anne van Kesteren; Elliotte Harold; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WHAT WG List
Subject: Re
Or what makes you want to cannibalize an existing W3C Recommendation
which predates the formation of WHAT-WG?
Explain to me why Web Forms 2.0 shouldn't be incorporating more of
the great ideas in XForms-Tiny rather than the other way around. Why is
your approach to cannibalize an existing W3C
, January 23, 2007 10:58 AM
To: Klotz, Leigh; Matthew Raymond; Dave Raggett
Cc: WHAT WG List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; public-appformats@w3.org
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Comparison of XForms-Tiny and WF2
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:51:55 -0500, Klotz, Leigh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Or what makes you want
This use case is exactly why browsers allow XForms controls inside
xf:message.
One minor quibble is that the message is not a different XForms
document, but is part of the same host document (XHTML probably), and
operates on the same model.
You can use xf:duplicate from Xforms 1.1 to implement the
