Live data from Hacker News

W3C HTML JSON form submission

w3.org

11–20 of 103 posts

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#11
post #8

Submitting files with this form encoding is of course going to have the base64 overhead, but otherwise this looks great!

Yea this makes me wish there was a better way to deal with this. JSON is popular because it's simple, but as a result sucks for a bunch of use-cases.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#13
The JSON-based file upload would be nice (AFAIK there's not great way to do this ATM, but I haven't looked in over a year). The rest seems pretty weak-tea though. I can see multiple issues with more defined type (e.g. numeric rather than string values, null rather than blank string), but without dealing with that stuff, this seems of extremely limited utility.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#14

It amazes me that we're now at the point of standardizing sticking array references inside strings and yet we're still not having a serious discussion about what comes after HTML.

What's wrong with a human-readable serialization format?

Nothing - I was talking about this:

    
    

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with a human-readable serialization format?

Nothing - I was talking about this:

Whoa. I missed that. Probably by clicking the link to the serialization algorithm.

That's bad. Really, really bad.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#17

> wow[such][deep][3][much][power][!] And there goes my interest for this submission. Don't use overused memes in a submission. Liking the idea though.

I enjoyed this. I also liked the Bender reference.

It reminded me of that show that makes me laugh on Netflix.

It also illustrated the point that he was trying to make. I prefer warm examples, rather than ones using book titles.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#18
post #2

They're still working on XForms after 10 years http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/

Isn't that kind of like saying "They're still working on HTML after 23 years"? Technically you're right, but version 1.1 of XForms was completed and published over 5 years ago. That said, XForms is dead AFAIK, and that's not a bad thing.

Work on XForms 2.0 is ongoing! Odds of it ever getting implemented in a browser are slim, however.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#19

It amazes me that we're now at the point of standardizing sticking array references inside strings and yet we're still not having a serious discussion about what comes after HTML.

It amazes me that you think we could have a serious discussion about what comes after HTML when essentially nobody is seriously considering replacing HTML. HTML is what it is, nothing else is what HTML is, and HTML is going to be around a good long while.

Re: W3C HTML JSON form submission

#20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with a human-readable serialization format?

Nothing - I was talking about this:

I guess that it's because at first, it was assumed that it was one of the servers jobs to parse such structures based on their names.

Since these same servers failed to establish a consensus (Django using "a=1&a=2" as array, whilst php uses "a[]=1&a[]=1", for example), someone has to start ...

Post reply on HN