Re: comments on GRDDL tests (mime types and atom/turtle)

On Jan 17, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
> [...]
> 3) atom-grddl.xml
>
> I don't attempt to pass this yet, and would find it a lot easier if  
> the xsl was changed from:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/atom2turtle_xslt-1.0.xsl
>
>   <xsl:output method="text"/>
>
> to
>
>   <xsl:output method="text" media-type="text/rdf+n3" />

Yes, I took an action to do that in our 6 Dec meeting
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Dec/att-0011/ 
06-grddl-wg-minutes.html__charset_us-ascii

OK, it's done now:

atom2turtle_xslt-1.0.xsl,v
revision 1.2
date: 2007/01/17 19:43:37;  author: connolly;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
declare text/rdf+n3 media type

testlist1.html,v
revision 1.30
date: 2007/01/17 19:43:06;  author: connolly;  state: Exp;  lines: +4 -3
note unregistered text/rdf+n3 media type

The decision we made that day involves me adding some spec text too; I  
haven't
done that yet:

"RESOLUTION: to resolve issue-output-formats by (1) adding formal rules  
to cover the case of of the XSLT 1.0 and RDF/XML (2) to allow other  
output formats as exemplified by the Atom/turtle test case"

> It wouldn't harm if some of the other tests explicitly had:
>
>   <xsl:output  media-type="application/rdf+xml" />

That's probably worth doing in the future; I don't feel like changing  
existing
transformations just now. If it turns out to matter in practice, let me  
know.

More on points 4+ separately...

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/