> For HTML::FillInForm I ask myself, how does it compare to HTML::Form,
> HTML::FormValidator, HTML::ParseForm, HTML::StickyForms,
> HTTP::Request::Form, and CGI? Would you suggest it should be added to
> the module list too?
HTML::Form is intended to be used with the LWP module for making requests.
Unlike HTML::FillInForm, it is not intended to be used for displaying
forms.
HTML::FormValidator is complementary to HTML::FillInForm. It only returns
a list of fields that the user forgot to validate. It does not fill in
any HTML forms.
HTML::ParseForm is an idea that is very similar to HTML::FillInForm. I
have been in contact with the author (Nicolas Monnet). It is still in the
idea stage, and I'm not sure if it is going to be implemented.
HTML::StickyForms implementes a lightweight version of CGI.pm's form
generating functionality. Unlike HTML::FillInForm, it does not take an
existing form and fill the values.
HTTP::Request::Form is intended to be used with HTTP::Request. Unlike
HTML::FillInForm, it is not intended to be used for displaying forms.
CGI (like HTML::StickyForms) generates sticky form elements through Perl
code. The main disadvantage of CGI/HTML::StickyForms is that it does not
allow for the seperation of the HTML design from the perl code.
In summary, only this module fills a need for filling in HTML Forms with
sticky values, while seperating the HTML from the Perl. HTML::ParseForm
was similar in intent, but I'm not sure if it will be implemented.
So yes, I would suggest that this module should be added to the
modulelist. Please let me know if you have any other questions or
feedback.
Thanks,
T.J. Mather
