> Yes, in some detail. I knew you would have done Justin, I was counting on it! :)
> Yes that chould be done, though I think there is no "hidden field" in > xForms, rather an instance of data, left unbound. yea - thats the gist of what I was poorly trying to convey. > delayed , as the new draft has just come out. God (ie > B.Gates) knows when it > will makes its way into IE. hmmm. he's bound to bugger it up with a proprietary alternative isn't he. > There is a java based browser that supports [most of] xForms, isn't that x-smiles? http://www.x-smiles.org/ (crap name) > Having said that, have a look at it. And if you have > opinions, let them be > known to the w3c XForms group. That's what it is there for. hmm, yes, I will be looking at it more closely... theres a lot of stuff there that flash already does (multi page forms before server side interaction, acceptance of multimedia input, combining form controls) when harnessed with remoting. Having this though would provide a useful non-flash alternative because when all is said and done, its still a PITA to create and use dynamic flash movies (although it is now easier than ever before). Cheers Justin. -- ** Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40lists.cfdeveloper.co.uk/ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For human help, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
