Now, given an enterprise workforce of those with qualified sentient understanding of their topic areas, Watson-style expert advisors are just the type of technological advancement that will help them work smarter, not harder, to meet the needs of customers and colleagues and to produce a competitive advantage for the business.
Smarter Everyone, Smarter Everything, Smarter Everywhere
John M. Boyer 060000VMNY Tags:  cognitivecomputing analytics ibm watson smarterworkforce 2 Comments 4,788 Views
In a recent video interview, the IBM CEO Ginni Rometty comments that Watson 2.0 will understand images that it sees, and that Watson 3.0 will be able to debate, i.e. to understand what it is talking about with another party. An impressive roadmap, each of these is an incredible leap forward from its predecessor.
It is, however, worth qualifying the term 'understand'. It is being used figuratively, not literally, to communicate the rough order of magnitude improvement in capability. When such a leap is made, it seems analogous to sentient understanding, even though it isn't. Imagine for a moment what Archimedes would have thought at first of a hand-held calculator, given that he had the power of Roman numerals with which to calculate pi to several digits. And yet, we would not now interpret such a device as artificial intelligence. As soon as the mechanical nature of a level of capability becomes clear, so too does the fact that it does not constitute sentient intelligence (Hofstadter's exposition of Tesler's "theorem").
You can see this assertion play out in multiple levels of Bob Sutor's scale of cognitive computing. There are levels that are clearly not cognitive intelligence, as Sutor points out, but if you lay out the scale on a timeline of decades or centuries, it is clear that each level might once have been interpreted as being indistinguishable from magic.
So where on Sutor's scale is Watson? And what implications does that have for development best practices?
Watson is clearly not on the "Sentient (we can do without humans) systems" level. As sentient beings, we don't just know things with a certain calculated accuracy or confidence level, or determine that we don't know if our confidence is low. We experience desire to know more, and we experience fear of the unknown. We are teetering bulbs of dread and dream (Hofstadter's delightful invocation of a Russell Edson poem). I urge you to let that characterization of us sink into your mind. In Watson technology, IBM has modeled a certain class of knowledge and mechanical reasoning, and in other research, IBM is doing so by simulating some of the known structure of biological brains. However, we don't yet know how to model fear and desire, dread and dream. In my opinion, these are inextricably bound together in sentient intelligence, separating it from simulated intelligence. In other words, intelligent behavior is a construct that works for the dread and dream engine of the sentient, and in the absence of dread and dream, seeming intelligent behavior is but a mechanical simulation of understanding. As an aside, I hope we only manage to model desire and fear around the same time we figure out how to model ethics (as Asimov cautions).
Does this characterization of Watson as a mechanical simulation of understanding detract from its value? Does it detract from the order of magnitude improvement it heralds as an usher of the era of cognitive computing? Of course not, quite the opposite. It is simply fantastic that this level of "Learning, Reasoning, Inference Systems" (Sutor's scale) is now computationally and economically feasible at the scale needed to help sentient intelligence (that's us) to solve real world problems. Quick, what is the square root of 7. Can't do it? No problem. Even if you're Arthur Benjamin, you'd be better off just hitting a few keys on a calculator. Quick, what are the most likely diagnoses for the patient's presenting symptoms? An "expert advisor" like Watson can be just what it takes to help determine the next best action, especially when time is of the essence because a life hangs in the balance.
The term "expert advisor" is appropriate. It conveys that the system is a "Learning, Reasoning, Inference System" that does not have sentient understanding and is therefore made available to advise and guide the actions of an expert. This is analogous to the way spreadsheets guide the results reported by accountants and chief financial officers. That being said, we also know not to put spreadsheets in the hands of toddlers. From a development practice standpoint, it is crucial to keep in mind that "expert advisor" means that the deployed system should be advising someone who is a qualified expert in the exact domain in which the "expert advisor" system was trained. Especially when a life hangs in the balance, access to the "expert advisor" system needs to be performed by those with expert qualifications in the domain because only they can reasonably be expected to use sentient understanding to interpret and follow up on the advice. In other words, the term 'expert' in 'expert advisor' should apply to the user more so than the advisor.
Due to being an eponymous blog, it has become that time to redirect my blog and increase its aperture to cover a much wider range of IBM-related topics that developers will find interesting and that reflect my own broader range of pursuits and thoughts within IBM.
These days I work in the Smarter Workforce segment of IBM Collaboration Solutions, which is responsible for building out cloud-based solutions for employee talent optimization. How do you attract employees? Retain them? Provide education when they are recruited, promoted or need remediation? How do you best equip employees to share information and enable one another to achieve better customer satisfaction and better business results? How do you measure the results?
So, if you're not in this particular problem space, why should you care? Well, there is a remarkable dynamism in this problem space due to the fact that it seeks to help human beings interact more effectively and efficiently with other human beings. As a result, many of today's most interesting topics, technologies and techniques are applicable: social computing, cloud computing, mobile computing, security, bigdata, business analytics and algorithms, and even psychological science and cognitive computing.
Think about what it takes to give everyone a smarter edge. Think of everything that might be needed to do it, plus everything they might want to do, and everything they might want to do it with. Then, think of enabling them to do it everywhere. Now we're talking the same language.
When I started on Java Server Pages (JSP) as a topic, I had intended it to be a blog topic. But it grew quite beyond blog size, so now that the technical work is finished, I can give you the meta-level on using JSP with Enterprise IBM Forms.
The work I'm telling you about here is intended to make it easy for you to exploit the powerful, simplifying JSP technique within the XFDL+XForms markup of IBM Forms documents. It took a some work to sort it all out, but with that done, it is easy for you to replicate what I did and gain the benefits. I wrote this wiki page on the IBM Forms product wiki to help you get set up, and the page references the developerWorks article I put together to show how to use JSP in your XFDL+XForms forms.
It was pretty challenging to get the JSP to talk to the Webform Server Translator module, so I was pretty happy when that started to work for me. It's one of those cases of only needing a line or two of code, but it being really hard to get exactly the right line or two. As Mark Twain once said, it's like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug. Anyway now that we know the smidge of code, it's easy for you to copy and use in your XFDL-based JSPs.
At first I thought, OK I have a good blog topic, but then I realized we weren't covering the full Forms information lifecycle. Put simply, a form is possibly prepopulated and then served, it collects data, but then it comes back and you have to do something with the data collected. So, back for more work sorting out how to receive a completed form into a JSP and use its values in JSP scriptlet code that helps prepopulate the next outbound form. This was a fair bit less challenging, as it maps very closely to how you start up the IBM Forms API in a regular Java servlet. Remember, JSP is just a convenient notation that the web application server knows how to turn into a Java servlet. JSP just makes it easier for you to focus on your special sauce application code.
Well, now that I could handle the whole Forms information lifecycle, I realized I hadn't covered the software development lifecycle. Back to the salt mines again. The problem was that JSP annotations are incompatible with XML. Although there is an alternative XML syntax for JSP, I devote a section in the article to explaining why it's a bit of a train wreck, and I focus instead on the normal JSP annotations. By representing them as XML processing instructions, we're able to maintain the XFDL and the JSP logic together using the IBM Forms Designer, and then use an XSLT to convert to actual JSP when it's time to deploy the IBM Form. This was really important to me because, quite frankly, if a new feature does not work in the Design environment for a language, then the feature essentially does not exist in the language.
Now, that's a wrap! I hope you like the article and get accelerated development benefit from it. JSP is really for building quick prototypes and demos, and also for solving simpler problems much more simply than using straight Java servlet coding. It's even a really nice complement to using Java servlet coding within a larger project. So don't delay, get ready to use JSP with XFDL today.
Something happened today that seemed like perfect fodder for this blog because it combines a humanitarian story, social business, and a good use case for IBM Forms Experience Builder in a social business context.
An esteemed colleague at my Canada software lab site is the organizer for our site's donations and efforts for a local charitable cause. Turns out, IBM has a special charitable grant program in which IBM makes a substantial additional donation to the charity if a set number of IBMers sign up as volunteers. I really like this model because it essentially gives IBMers a way to vote, not only on how much IBM corporately donates but also where the donation goes. It's the same reason I like charitable tax incentives, as it is essentially the same as the federal government allowing the people to vote on the charitable causes they support and how much tax money goes to them.
Anyway, IBM internally runs an enterprise social business platform called Connections, which includes profile pages for all IBMers. These are like Facebook or LinkedIn pages, only inside the corporate firewall. Still, there is information that would not normally show up on one's profile page, but which my colleague needs in order to complete our internal IBM charitable grant application. So, my colleague has found it necessary to reach out to a large number of people at our site to get this information; she's under a tight timeline, and she needs responses from everyone.
This is a great example use case for IBM Forms Experience Builder. One reason is that my colleague needs to quickly stand up a lightweight custom data collection solution, where we'd miss the grant deadline for our charity if we had to wait for a normal IT project to be completed. So, this is a great example of workforce agility to be gained. Yet, on a technical front, this is interesting because it is so easy to see that the solution needs two forms, and their corresponding backend DB storage, as well as a service to connect one to the other. The fact that you can make all this stuff and hook it up in your web browser without coding is truly a step forward in IT democratization.
In this solution, my colleague can create a first LIST form that simply allows her to enter the names of all the people that she needs to get information from. Each person's email address can then be automatically looked up by hooking up into the form the LDAP lookup service that is added to our installation of Forms Experience Builder.
Then, my colleague can create a second COLLECT form that allows each person to provide the information she needs.
Most importantly, my colleague really needs to be able to re-enter her LIST form at any time, not to add more names, but rather to see which people have submitted the COLLECT form-- and which haven't. To do this, she can automatically hook up the database for the COLLECT form as a service to her LIST form. As each person fills the COLLECT form, their entry on the LIST form can show their required information.
At any point, my colleague can look at her LIST form for blank entries to see those people with whom she has to take "secondary measures" to ensure 100% response before the deadline. Most importantly, her LIST form would already then have all the information she requires collected into one place.
Can you imagine how much more work she'd have to do if she did all this by email? She'd have a flood of emails mixed with her normal email, and she'd have to fish out the information from each email and put it into a list manually. Tedious, error prone, and lots more ways to miss the deadline. My colleague is be able to collaborate much more efficiently and effectively using a 2-form IBM Forms Experience Builder solution, and this is why lightweight data management solutions should be added as an essential ingredient of an enterprise grade social business platform. Specifically, if you're going to purchase IBM Connections, then add IBM Forms Experience Builder.
Last blog I told you how you could get a "Greenhouse" account that gives you access to a cloud-hosted build-without-coding environment for constructing and deploying data-centric IT solutions. The product is called IBM Forms Experience Builder (FEB), and I want to spend some time on this blog giving you a better sense of the solutions you can create.
The solution I'd like to cover is a bit more advanced than a "Hello, World" solution; maybe I'll do one of those in the next blog. But the first thing I wanted to be able to do was use my account to enable myself to share solution files with you over time. Every FEB solution has a body of code that represents it. You can export the serialization of any solution as a file so that it can be imported into another account or onto another FEB server. So, I wanted to create a FEB solution that allowed me to share FEB solution files with anyone. I created that "Simple File Sharer" solution and then used it to share the "Simple File Sharer" solution file. You can get the file here (requires Greenhouse account login).
Once you have the solution file, you can import it into your own FEB account within Greenhouse and then use it to share files, especially any sample FEB solutions.
The Simple File Sharer solution uses ordinary features in the form (user interface). I just dragged and dropped a table item, and then put a name, description and upload component into the table. I also dragged and dropped a textual label so I could provide some basic instructions for users of the solution.
The Simple File Sharer solution uses some more interesting FEB capabilities to implement behavioral features around the form user interface.
In conclusion, the Simple File Sharer solution may only allow me to create a record, but it still ends up demonstrating a number of FEB features that you would commonly use in solutions that allow multiple users to create and edit records. In the future, I'll share more solutions with you that highlight various FEB features that contribute to creating interesting solutions. Remember, it's not about just forms; it's really about the whole solution you can wrap around forms, including automatic database storage, access control, lightweight workflow stages, and even configuring web services-- all without coding. And that's what makes IBM Forms Experience Builder a platform-as-a-service capability that everyone from a line-of-business users up to an IT professional can appreciate!
How would you like to be able to construct, deploy and get results from IT solutions using only your web browser?
Don't believe me? Well, how about coming to the IBM Forms wiki, where you can watch a few short videos that show you.
You'll be intrigued and want to go the next step. One of the prominently available wiki pages is a community article that gives you a starter pack of prebuilt solutions like the ones you see in the video. You can download any one or all of them because they're just single files that describe the forms, access control, workflow stages and other resources of each solution. You can import any of them into your own IBM Forms Experience Builder server, and then deploy them, use them, get results from them, and of course edit them to see how they work or to change them and redeploy them. All from your web browser.
Don't have an IBM Forms Experience Builder server to try it out? Well, now we've gotten to the main topic of this blog article. You can get your own free public access to an IBM Forms Experience Builder server. You can try out any of these starter pack solutions as well as build and deploy any of your own solutions.
Since you will be a builder of forms experience solutions, we will need to be able to present your solutions to you, distinguished from everyone else's solutions. So, you'll have to start by registering yourself with the system that hosts the IBM Forms Experience Builder server. The system is called Lotus Greenhouse, so click the link and then choose "Sign up" to get your account.
Once you're able to log in to Greenhouse, you'll get access to a number of software products including IBM's social business software (Connections), IBM Websphere Portal Server, and of course IBM Forms Experience Builder. However, you don't really need to log in to Greenhouse then menu navigate to IBM Forms Experience Builder when you can just bookmark the direct link to IBM Forms Experience Builder on Greenhouse.
Once you log in with your Greenhouse user id and password, you'll see the "Manage" solutions page, which lists all of the Forms Experience Builder (FEB) applications that you have designed. This is the page that gives you the ability to create a "New Application" or "Import" one of those starter pack applications, all at the press of a button.
So, now you can try out and evaluate IBM Forms Experience Builder now to see for yourself that there really is a smarter web where you can construct valuable solutions without coding now. If you are building IT solutions for your organization, you owe it to yourself to see how much more effective you'll be at satisfying your organization's IT solution demands. But even more importantly, if you're competing for IT solution services contracts, you owe it to yourself to become an IBM business partner or to expand your partnership to include IBM Forms Experience Builder. And finally, if you like to build industry-specific data management products, then you should consider becoming an IBM value-added reseller (VAR) so you can build your products more efficiently with IBM Forms Experience Builder and go to market with IBM to sell the bundle. In all these cases, you now have the access you need above so you can learn more and get started today.
Forms exist to collect data from web users involved in business processes. Are you a business partner who wants to build solutions more quickly in order to make a higher margin? Then read on!
What if you could use a web browser to design not only the user interfaces of the multiple pages of a form, but also the whole solution for which it collects data?
Now, with IBM Forms Experience Builder, you finally can.
You can define the roles of users in the business process, and you can assign users and groups to those roles. You can even set up open roles whose users are defined dynamically during the business process once the right information is collected earlier in the process. For example, only once you take in a person's name can you access an LDAP service to look up his manager and then assign that person to the manager role for an approval step.
You can define the user interface of a Form, and have an automatic database created on the server side to store database records corresponding to completed instances of that Form. You can even define multiple Forms that work together within a solution that collects data according to different record schemas.
You can define the stages of a business process workflow that uses the Form or Forms to create and update database records. Stage transitions can branch forward, backward or even stay on the same stage to update a database record that still needs more work.
You can define access control for each workflow stage and determine which Forms, page, and UI elements are available in each stage.
You can even use the database records collected with one Form as a GUI configurable web service within the fill experience of a second Form. For example, you could have one Form of a solution that collects inventory data, and then use that data in a second Form that makes it possible to order from available inventory.
You can make the Form fill experience available within a portlet of an IBM Websphere Portal website.
You can create a solution with your web browser, you can save it to the server, you can hit Deploy in your web browser, and then your users can access the Forms of the solution from web links. If you later decide it is necessarily to add to or change the solution, you can edit the solution again using your web browser and hit Deploy again The data is retained for all the remaining form UI elements, and the database tables are altered as needed to make space to store data collected by any new form UI elements.
Via web links, users can access the list of database records collected by the solution. Only the records to which the user has access are presented. If you're the solution creator/administrator, you can get access to all the records. Whomever is given a link to view the records can also set up their own customized filters for the data, so a user can truly use the view as a business process task list, and even filter down to tasks of a particular type, from a particular person, having met or exceeded some value, etc.
Complete agile web solution creation.
Lose the custom coding, gain the market advantage, get IBM Forms Experience Builder now.
Continuing with the amazing stuff you can do with the eval() function: You can use it in a user interface binding to enable your form to programmatically control what the user sees.
As an exhibition of this capability, I'll give you the pertinent parts of an XML editor form that dynamically adjusts to XML structure and allows you to edit the content of any leaf nodes while giving you link buttons to allow you to drill deeper into element subtrees as well as a "back" button to go to the parent of any subtree whose leaves you may be editing. It starts with an XForms repeat, like this:
<xforms:repeat nodeset="eval(repeatexpr)" id="XMLEditor">
The repeat expression is computed by the form and is changed by user actions that drill deeper into the XML tree or go back to parent elements. The repeat expression will end with "/*" so that the controls in the repeat will show the children of whatever node the repeat expression selects before the "/*".
For simplicity, I've put the XML data to be edited as the first element of the instance that also manages the calculation of the repeat expression, but you could do this as two separate instances instead. Here's the instance structure I used in this example:
<xforms:instance id="data" xmlns="">
The first element could be anything, but I used a "purchase order" data structure, so this form will magically morph into a purchase order editor. Further, it should now be clear why in the last blog I concentrated on data that carried its own formula calculations and data validation rules. If I replace the Purchase-Order element above with the loan calculation data below, then this same form will help calculate your monthly payment on a loan:
<Loan-Application label="ACME Used Car Loan Application">
<Principal required="true" constraint="Principal > 0 and Principal <= 50000"></Principal>
<Duration required="true" constraint="Duration > 0 and Duration <= 84"></Duration>
<Interest-Rate constraint1="Interest-Rate > 0"
<rate hidden="true" value="Interest-Rate div 1200.0"/>
Within the repeat, we can use different kinds of form controls to be responsive to the identified types of data and also to the issue of whether something is an input or an output based on whether it has a computed value. Here are two examples at the XFDL+XForms level:
In the predicates of the form controls, "not (*)" ensures that these form controls are only relevant if the data node is a leaf that is to be filled with character content. The "value" attribute in the data provides a calculation formula, so that has been used to distinguish when to provide and input versus an output form control. The two examples above make relevant form controls for data elements annotated with a currency type attribute. Other form controls for checkboxes and dates can be created to bind to types like booleans and dates.
Next, let's look at how the repeat expression is computed:
<xforms:bind nodeset="firstelem" calculate="local-name(instance('data')/*)" />
OK, so how do we adjust what the XForms repeat presents to the user? Basically, we want to either add a child element name to drill down into a subtree or we want to subtract a child element name to go up a level. First, let's cover how to add an element, i.e. add a step to the location "path". Inside the repeat, each child element that is a subtree root (has children) gets an XForms trigger in a link style button. If you activate the trigger (press the button) then you drill down into the corresponding node. Here's what that looks like:
The trigger ref binds to a node that has children, as tested by the predicate "[*]". The label shows the name of the child element whose subtree you will drill into if you activate the trigger. The action sequence simply chucks a slash plus that name onto the end of the "expr" as a new step in the location path. This adds to the "path" which adds to the "repeatexpr" which updates the XForms repeat to show the children of that subtree root.
The trigger to go back up to a parent from a child is something that would live outside of the repeat because you only need one "back" button. It's actually a bit trickier because you can't get the last slash in order to lop off the last location step in the path. Fortunately, XPath lets you find the first occurrence of a substring, and XForms actions include a loop. So, the way I did this was to construct a new expression out of all the location steps in the old one, except the last, which was detectable by there being no more slashes. Here's what that looks like:
<xforms:trigger id="GoBack" ref="expr">
The first setvalue copies the "expr" less the leading slash into the "scratchexpr". Then, we clear out the "expr" so we can build it up anew from the parts of the scratchexpr. Now, we execute while "scratchexpr" still contains a slash, so the loop stops short of copying the last location step from scratchexpr to expr. Once the processing is complete, then once again, the modifications made to expr, reverberate to "path" then to "repeatexpr" due to the XForms binds above, and so the XForms repeat updates to show and allow editing of the content of the parent element.
And that's it! Thanks to eval() used in combination with all other pre-existing features of XForms, you can make a form that edits any XML element data structure.
There are a number of new XPath extension functions available to XForms developers in the latest release of IBM Forms, and I'd like to draw your attention to two of them: eval() and eval-in-context(), and they are wicked cool!
The function eval(expr) evaluates expr in the context of the function call and returns the result. The eval-in-context(expr, contextExpr) function does a similar thing, except it first evaluates the contextExpr and uses the result as the context for the main expression. This is desparately needed for XPath 1.0 expressions to eliminate the infestation of pesky ".." operations that typically occurs. I've used it, rather than eval(), in the samples below.
One use of these functions is to enable the powerful capability to let XML data carry sophisticated dynamic metadata, which can then be implemented and enforced with singular XForms bind elements that attach the semantics of the metadata whereever it is found in the data.
It turns out that the xsi:type attribute from XML schema is already a rudimentary version of the metadata idea we're pursuing here, so the question becomes what if you could do it for all of the juicy metadata that XForms contains, like calculated data values, data validity constraints, and so forth? Let's look at what this "decorated" data might look like for a simple expense report:
It is really easy to use XPath capabilities to find all elements having a value attribute and then to bind an XForms calculate formula to those elements, and then eval-in-context() is used to determine the result according to whatever expression is given in the data, like this:
<xforms:bind nodeset="descendant::*[@value]" calculate="eval-in-context(@value, ..)"/>
The nodeset expression starts with descendant::* to explore all elements of the data, and then the predicate [@value] selects all elements that have a value attribute. For each such element node, a calculate formula is bound to it by the XForms bind. The eval-in-context() call uses ".." to go up a level so that the formulas in the value attributes can omit "../", e.g. so the expression can simply be "quantity * price" rather than "../quantity * ../price".
Similarly, a data validation constraint can be attached like this:
In other scenarios, you may want to control the other metadata properties like relevant, required and readonly. Here's an example of data where relevance and requiredness control is needed:
The xsi:type assignment for age already works in XForms without needing a bind. The required setting for name is statically true, not dynamically changeable, so it is very handy to be able to allow either a static boolean value or an expression, like this:
At this point, it's probably safe to leave the readonly bind as an exercise for the reader :-)
Information system architects, and even vertical industry standardization or government IT standardization bodies, derive immense value from XML schema definitions that describe the data structures and data types expected in valid transactions of the information system. However, these assets are focused on defining the completed transaction. In many a presentation, I've talked to potential customers about how IBM Forms documents express far more value because they are about the human interaction that takes place during the fill experience needed to produce those completed transactions.
As a bit of an aside, it's important for the technically minded reader to be familiar with the "sell" side of this equation. It is important to be able to easily justify technology adoption decisions with business owners who need to be able to understand how you will be able to better server your customers, reduce development and maintenance costs, increase competitiveness, eliminate vendor lock-in, etc.
In this blog, I'd like enumerate various benefits that you get from the standards basis of IBM Forms documents and their implementations, but I'd also like to separate the enumerations into two lists: 1) benefits above using XML Schema that you get just from using the XForms markup within an IBM Form, and 2) the benefits you get from the XFDL processor (XFDL is the XML vocabulary that IBM Forms provides as a presentation layer for XForms).
Firstly, an XForm is a clearly a superset of XML Schema since an XForm can incorporate the XML Schema if it is available and provide its validation information set to the fill experience and the submission experience. But an XForm provides many additional benefits, including the ability to:
While the above benefits indicate what additional behaviors and features of XML forms can be expressed above those that can be expressed by an XML Schema alone, XForms is also more interesting for standardization of a forms repository due to what it does not express. An XForm does not rigorously bind its many behavioral benefit to a specific presentation layer of the form. The intention of this language architecture was to address multimodal requirements of forms applications, e.g. rendition on a desktop, tablet, smartphone, telephone call-in voice service or instant messaging interaction. Different presentation layer implementations can address these requirements, and such implementations can even be provided by different vendors. The XForms working group also anticipated that there would be a wide array of varied technical requirements for presentation layers, and this language architecture allows XForms to be used with fundamentally different XML presentation languages that address these disparate requirements. Examples range from ODF for flowing text with fill-in-the-blanks fields to XFDL with its high-precision contract-style layout capability.
Due to the above mentioned language architecture, XForms markup does not comprise a well-formed XML document until it is incorporated into a presentation layer XML document. XFDL in the XML vocabulary used in IBM Forms to provide a presentation layer for XForms.
Of course, in a "baseline standard" version of a form, the default presentation layer associated with the XForms markup can be minimal in nature so that the only benefit is to provide a well-formed XML document to host the XForms markup. Interestingly, once you have this from XFDL, then the result is in fact an XML document, and so it can be processed by readily available XML processing tools like XSLT. These XML tools can be usd to automate creation of different versions of the baseline form that may have a richer presentation description, alternative natural language usage, or even different presentation layer markup. In addition, various consumers could use simple XML tooling to rebrand the forms.
The Extensible Forms Description Language (XFDL) in an XML vocabulary describing the presentation layer and richly interactive behaviors of modern web-based electronic forms. This XML vocabulary was first introduced to the W3C in 1998 (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-XFDL) and over the years, the versions of the language have consumed XML data-processing components of the W3C XML technology stack as they have been standardized by the W3C, especially including XML Schema, XForms, and XML Signatures. XFDL is a royalty-free open format whose current version specification, which can be obtained from -
XFDL is a host XML language for the XForms standard, and so the many benefits of XForms described above are inherited by XFDL. The implementations of XFDL as a presentation layer language add the following benefits over the core XForms processing:
In a larger sense, though, this only part of the benefit derived from XFDL. Still more benefit is derived from the availability of the XFDL forms visual design environment, which gives form authors integrated access to GUI features for XForms, for XML Signatures, for schema-driven design, for web sevice connections, and for the XFDL language benefits included in the list. The design environment even includes a converter that helps preserve the layout of PDF Forms that are brought over into XFDL. Finally, the XFDL forms visual design environment also provides features for maintaining a collection of forms, such as SVN and other team repository plugins and management of form parts.