W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > October to December 2006

comment on xslt_literal_result test

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 14:35:02 +0000
Message-ID: <45782696.2060500@hpl.hp.com>
To: public-grddl-comments@w3.org

with mimetype application/xml

I think the GRDDL WG should duck this one. It is not a GRDDL document, 
and so the WG does not need to decide on it. Any particular behaviour 
for GRDDL clients, fixed by WG decision, concerning an ill-conceived 
document, puts a burden on implementers. I would find it acceptable to 
simply label this as an error test case, i.e. a test:NegativeParserTest.
For instance, my implementation is likely to try and read it as RDF/XML 
and will both report errors, and give some triples. However, it doesn't 
seem unreasonable to apply XSLT and then read it as RDF/XML, but that 
isn't GRDDL - GRDDL isn't triggered by xsl:version, it is triggered by 
dataview:transformation ...

(The loop example though is a good test!)

Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 14:35:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:55:02 UTC