Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Moreover, it says "The plan is, informed by Webforms, to extend HTML forms." 
> as opposed to "adopt WebForms 2.0" or something like that.

I didn't know how to interpret that section about forms when I read it 
because Tim's statements are rather vague.  However, a frightening 
thought just struck me.

Could it mean that the W3C isn't going to use WF2 directly, but rather 
push ahead with Dave Ragget's Forms Lite proposal [1]?  There seems to 
be significant discussion about it going on at www-forms [2].  The 
proposal seems to throw out much of the WF2 work (including some 
explicitly because of Opera's existing implementation), in favour a very 
much corrupted version that is somehow attempting to integrate with XForms.

> Or will the WHAT WG activities continue with an endorsement from the W3C?

I hope so.

[1] http://people.w3.org/~dsr/forms-lite/ 
[2] http://www.w3.org/mid/Pine.LNX.4.64.0610241131260.5740@holly 

-- 
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/