W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: base-uri and XSLT 1.0 [OK?]

From: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:57:46 -0700
Message-ID: <4664C31A.1020701@dajobe.org>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
CC: public-grddl-comments@w3.org

Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> 
> Hi Dave
> 
> I am writing on behalf of the GRDDL WG to respond to your earlier message.
> 
> Thank you for your helpful comment.
> 
> We agreed that "it's a bug in the above sheets." (in your words).
> 
> More specifically:
> 
> concerning
> http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/soft/RDFa2RDFXML.xsl
>   This sheet does not exhibit the bug.
>   The parameter is optional, and when omitted the sheet functions as
> intended as a GRDDL transform, see:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007May/0069
> 
> concerning:
> http://www.w3.org/2000/08/w3c-synd/home2rss.xsl
> we have asked Dan Connolly to look into the issue:
> [PENDING] ACTION: DanC to remove base param from online GRDDL service
> and home2rss.xsl [recorded in
> http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action08]
> 
> we also have the following related possible bug in a stylesheet
> [PENDING] ACTION: HH to remove or clarify base param in eRDF
> transformation [recorded in
> http://www.w3.org/2007/05/30-grddl-wg-minutes.html#action09]
> 
> We do not believe that either the GRDDL Specification or the GRDDL Test
> Cases needs any modification in response to your comment.
> 
> Please reply to confirm that this is a satisfactory response.


Yes, that's satisfactory.  Thanks for the clarifications.

I'll probably be keeping the param definitions in my code since
it's no cost and at least some of the sheets above use them.  At
least the grddl spec and tests do not require them.

Dave
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2007 01:58:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:43 GMT