| CARVIEW |
Select Language
HTTP/2 200
date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 08:32:27 GMT
content-type: text/html
content-encoding: gzip
content-location: 0182.html
vary: negotiate,Accept-Encoding
tcn: choice
last-modified: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:54:07 GMT
cache-control: max-age=2592000, public
expires: Sat, 15 Nov 2025 08:32:27 GMT
access-control-allow-origin: *
x-request-id: 98749a00db37ccd2
strict-transport-security: max-age=15552015; preload
x-frame-options: deny
x-xss-protection: 1; mode=block
cf-cache-status: REVALIDATED
set-cookie: __cf_bm=aMOzAvosejqp55mkpsfGUX6IkCq73j3ETpf3wA_DSE0-1760603547-1.0.1.1-3dYZg.OkFAJXMxiOVDkr602TTwMAlvKH_wBcx1ciLrPdEc48YYsjFSerVyDNQ0uNj2J8LHZ01a.no.YU4chugOK1VT9oJXkjZz43pKKlR5Q; path=/; expires=Thu, 16-Oct-25 09:02:27 GMT; domain=.w3.org; HttpOnly; Secure; SameSite=None
server: cloudflare
cf-ray: 98f634a998d5a45e-BLR
alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400
GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms] from Dan Connolly on 2002-01-23 (www-tag@w3.org from January 2002)
GET should be encouraged, not deprecated, in XForms [was: Issue request for the TAG: XForms]
- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 23 Jan 2002 08:50:30 -0600
- To: www-forms-editor@w3.org
- Cc: "\\ Barstow Art ""(NMP/Boston)\\" <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, www-tag@w3.org, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Message-Id: <1011797431.3523.58.camel@dirk>
On Fri, 2002-01-18 at 17:21, Mark Baker wrote: > Since somebody else has brought up XForms, I'd like to point out the > following section (as discovered by Paul Prescod); > > https://www.w3.org/TR/xforms/slice4.html#evt-submit > > In particular, > > The HTTP "get" protocol is deprecated for use in form submission. > Form authors should use "post" for greater compatibility. Just on the basis of what I can see here, that looks pretty bad, to me... > I don't have an issue with XForms not supporting GET (though once it's > there, I wonder why you'd want to get rid of it), but I do have an > issue if it's deprecating GET *and* claiming to be able to replace > HTML forms; > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/0092.html > > The thread in which this is still being discussed is; > > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/thread.html#81 I see that XForms 1.0 is in last call... https://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xforms-20020118/ comments are due 22 February 2002; reviewing the archive of comments submitted to the feedback address, I don't see this in there. With apologies for the lateness of this comment (I should have looked at XForms long ago...), I'm afraid I must say I find this aspect of the design unacceptable, on the grounds that... "In HTTP, anything which does not have side-effects must use GET" -- https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Axioms.html#state I agree with Paul Prescod's argument in, e.g., https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-forms/2002Jan/0119.html I'm not speaking for the TAG; we haven't discussed it as a group yet. > FWIW, I don't think this requires TAG attention yet, but if any of the > TAG members are looking at XForms anyhow ... > > MB -- Dan Connolly, W3C https://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 23 January 2002 10:41:27 UTC