@Jerry -- unless Jake's been using hide-whens to let us read different articles, what you are suggesting is far from what Jake has been outlining. These are not "Treat as" forms, nor are they meant to be -- the Designer form works (and is supposed to work) just like a "normal" Domino form, using the standard form method and action values for editing and opening with a document for reading as normal. All he's done is turn off JS and supply a "what was clicked" field to receive the values posted by various submit buttons so he can determine server-side processing (essentially home-rolling the __Click field to trigger or fork WQS agents). That is a far cry from throwing away Domino's basic functionality, and certainly nothing like recreating JSP methodologies on the Domino platform. This is about using what Domino does, and does well, while trying to do away with features that may interfere with compliance with accessibility and usability guidelines. And while I think the process is going too far (mostly because of a misunderstanding of the capabilities of user agents), it is most certainly not throwing the baby out with the bathwater in the way you are suggesting.
@Jeff -- there is a perfectly workable JSP (and servlet) container available for no additional software cost. Garnet was a non-standard implementation, and while it may have had some kewl going for it, keeping it would have been the wrong decision both for Domino and for IBM as a whole. Get over it. Removing Garnet from the Rnext (Domino 6) code stream has absolutely nothing to do with the current real efforts to expand DXL on the web and create a genuine, fully-compliant XHTML output. Mark Vincenzes is the point man (public face) of these efforts; it would be worth your while to keep an eye on his developerWorks postings.
@Jerry -- unless Jake's been using hide-whens to let us read different articles, what you are suggesting is far from what Jake has been outlining. These are not "Treat as" forms, nor are they meant to be -- the Designer form works (and is supposed to work) just like a "normal" Domino form, using the standard form method and action values for editing and opening with a document for reading as normal. All he's done is turn off JS and supply a "what was clicked" field to receive the values posted by various submit buttons so he can determine server-side processing (essentially home-rolling the __Click field to trigger or fork WQS agents). That is a far cry from throwing away Domino's basic functionality, and certainly nothing like recreating JSP methodologies on the Domino platform. This is about using what Domino does, and does well, while trying to do away with features that may interfere with compliance with accessibility and usability guidelines. And while I think the process is going too far (mostly because of a misunderstanding of the capabilities of user agents), it is most certainly not throwing the baby out with the bathwater in the way you are suggesting.
@Jeff -- there is a perfectly workable JSP (and servlet) container available for no additional software cost. Garnet was a non-standard implementation, and while it may have had some kewl going for it, keeping it would have been the wrong decision both for Domino and for IBM as a whole. Get over it. Removing Garnet from the Rnext (Domino 6) code stream has absolutely nothing to do with the current real efforts to expand DXL on the web and create a genuine, fully-compliant XHTML output. Mark Vincenzes is the point man (public face) of these efforts; it would be worth your while to keep an eye on his developerWorks postings.