but if they all do, then you'll have to make some decissions on smart management of stylesheets and the like to get most if not everything from one (at least a limited number of) source-file...
I think it will take some of us actually doing these things before we get a real feel to the matter (we plan on a smaller try-out with WML in the not too distant future)
Another issue I see however is the mismatch of number of widgets per screen for each of these targets... this might call for splitting up a lot more of these sources then the big XML dream was promising :-)
Still Woody could at least do a best effort to ensure that all these targets can be reached by applying the same competence mix somewhat.
... what Marc is trying to convey is that automagical multiple-device rendering and reuse of one form definition might be a dream, but very difficult to achieve.
A form of set of forms represents a use-case. We are quite convinced, even if Woody might support multiple renditions, that the use-case across devices might be totally different. You typically don't want a one-on-one translation from a complicated HTML form to the set of simple widgets provided in a WAP environment: you are going to provide your users with entirely different use-case.
Does that makes sense? As I said, this doesn't mean we think Woody would put something in the way of moving forward in the direction you mentioned. But a one-on-one, even a smart one auto-translation maintaining the same form model across media, might not be what your users are looking for.
HTH,
</Steven> -- Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/ stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
