From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

enterprise quality?[edit]

what exactly is "enterprise quality" i thought "enterprise" was just Marketing speak and had little or nothing to do with actual coding practices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


XForms is also a the name of a toolkit for X11! cf.

Yeap, its actually a c library for creating X11 programs. I think it doesn't have a future though since its license make it unacceptable in most Linux distributions. for more information

It seems like this topic needs a disambiguation page. I would add one, if I had time, and someday I might. --Chris van Hasselt 19:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Not sure this is really needed. It looks like the "other" XForms is pretty much dead in the water anyway. The home page of that site hasn't been updated since 2002. Ebruchez 10:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)--

Note to implementors[edit]

While talking about the various implementations is good for implementors, this entry must not become the place for marketing. It is of course very tempting for implementors to push their implementation and use the high ranking of this entry in Google. As an implementor myself, I know this quite well.

I believe that it is fair and in line with Wikipedia policies to present existing implementations, but the point of view should remain as neutral as possible: all implementations have benefits and drawbacks, both should be recognized, and blatant marketing should be prohibited.--Ebruchez 00:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

On March 10, 2007 an unlogged user ( moved the Firefox extension above IBM Workplace Forms in the list of implementations. What is the rational? In what orders should implementations be listed? Should we list implementations based on their popularity? If this is the case, what is a good indication of popularity? Avernet 18:25, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
It seems IBM is there twice now. The top looks like it's talking about browsers and the bottom about non-browser applications. Shouldn't IBM then be moved fully to the bottom part? Also, there's a lot "but it can be done in Javascript" in there... we all know that something which relies on Javascript means not everyone can use it. Forms that users with screen readers, text browsers, and/or behind corporate firewalls can't fill in are useless forms. I'm not saying this should be in the article but that when the comparisons are done between methods, that should be kept in mind, as it clearly was in the Mobile Devices part of the page. Uh, I'm not logged in... (Dikke poes @ work) (talk) 09:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

excessive external links[edit]

Please remember that Wikipedia is not a directory of links. I have pruned all links except those from W3C, and linked to DMOZ's category on Xforms. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


This article could really use an example. -- Beland (talk) 00:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Market share[edit]

What fraction of web sites and mobile web sites use XForms? What other markets are significant? I can't imagine that very many do without major browser support. Is this essentially a moribund standard? -- Beland (talk) 16:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

xforms working group closed[edit]

"The Forms Working Group was officially closed on 2015-04-08" Does this mean W3C has abandoned XForms due to the fact that after a dozen years, no browser offers native support? Whitis (talk) 09:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on XForms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:49, 21 July 2016 (UTC)