100 lines
4.5 KiB
Plaintext
100 lines
4.5 KiB
Plaintext
From fork-admin@xent.com Mon Sep 30 13:53:27 2002
|
|
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
|
|
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
Received: from localhost (jalapeno [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by jmason.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CBF16F19
|
|
for <jm@localhost>; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:49:15 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from jalapeno [127.0.0.1]
|
|
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
|
|
for jm@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 30 Sep 2002 13:49:15 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
|
|
(8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8TErFg15436 for <jm@jmason.org>;
|
|
Sun, 29 Sep 2002 15:53:16 +0100
|
|
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
|
|
with ESMTP id 4C3772940A9; Sun, 29 Sep 2002 07:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241])
|
|
by xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97682940A0 for <fork@xent.com>;
|
|
Sun, 29 Sep 2002 07:52:35 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Received: from endeavors.com ([66.126.120.174]) by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net
|
|
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with ESMTP id
|
|
<0H3700J8CFZOE4@mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for fork@xent.com; Sun,
|
|
29 Sep 2002 07:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
From: Gregory Alan Bolcer <gbolcer@endeavors.com>
|
|
Subject: Re: EBusiness Webforms: cluetrain has left the station
|
|
To: FoRK <fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
|
|
Reply-To: gbolcer@endeavors.com
|
|
Message-Id: <3D971165.1CA9D617@endeavors.com>
|
|
Organization: Endeavors Technology, Inc.
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; IRIX 6.5 IP32)
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-Accept-Language: en, pdf
|
|
References: <3D95C839.8E8701FD@endeavors.com> <m2heg9anzx.fsf@maya.dyndns.org>
|
|
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
|
|
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
|
|
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
|
|
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
|
|
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
|
|
<mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
|
|
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
|
|
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 07:42:45 -0700
|
|
|
|
Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> Although it's like a total shock to 99.999% (5nines) of all the
|
|
> employed website designers out there, the truth is webforms /can/
|
|
> accept "U.S. of A" as a country. Incredible, but true. Web forms can
|
|
> also accept /multiple/ or even /free-form/ telephone numbers and can
|
|
> even be partitioned into manageable steps. All this can also be done
|
|
> without selling exclusive rights to your wallet to the World's
|
|
> Second-Richest Corporation (assuming Cisco is still #1) and vendor
|
|
> locking your business into their "small transaction fee" tithe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but you've just gotten to the crux of the
|
|
situation. There's good design and bad design.
|
|
There's good testing and bad testing. The problem
|
|
is, anyone can design a good Web form, but nobody
|
|
does. I think "best practices" hasn't caught up
|
|
on main street Web enablement yet. There's some
|
|
really great packages on how to do this stuff and
|
|
in fact the usability people knew that Web forms needed
|
|
to be fixed 5 years ago, so that's why we got XForms
|
|
and XHTML. You can shoot yourself in the foot and
|
|
people usually do. What the problem is, they don't
|
|
even recognize that they're gimpy--ever. They just
|
|
keeping trundling along making a mess of everything
|
|
assured in their job security that they can build
|
|
Web forms without even caring if they can be
|
|
used or not beyond their test machine.
|
|
|
|
If you had a piece of software and a security warning
|
|
came out 5 years ago on it, would you run that software?
|
|
Wouldn't you have patched or upgraded something so fundamentally
|
|
broken 4 years and 11 months ago? What I want to know
|
|
is why would someone use Web forms best practices from
|
|
5 years ago? I mean you can get a college degree in that
|
|
time. Imagine if the next version of Microsoft Windows
|
|
or Red Hat Linux forced you to use a tiled window
|
|
manager? Sure, tiled windows were the best we had for
|
|
a brief period of time, but they are completely useless
|
|
except for some terminal based replacement applications.
|
|
|
|
The bottom line is, if you can't get across the
|
|
bridge, then it's broken regardless of whose fault
|
|
it really is, and it's the business that
|
|
needs to take responsibility as they are the ones that
|
|
wanted to put the bridge there in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greg
|
|
|
|
|