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

Re: Comments on GRDDL (using 3rd-party XML schemas with GRDDL) [OK?]

From: Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:18:45 -0600
Message-Id: <200707182124.l6IC9GqX030455@agmgw2.us.oracle.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, Andrew Eisenberg <andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, w3c-xsl-query@w3.org


You may not understand why people would expect..., but it is obvious 
on the face of things that SOME people do expect it, witnessed by the 
comments and the repeated requests made to you.  If we, members of 
W3C and of at least room-temperature IQs, think this is something 
apparently missing, then it seems likely that at least some other 
readers might have the same misunderstanding.

Since it is your group's decision not to "pay attention" to schemas 
in your spec, I'm not going to try to persuade you to change that 
decision (at least not in this message), but that does not mean that 
you shouldn't acknowledge the expectations of some of your readers 
and at least say why you've made that choice.

Hope this helps,

At 7/18/2007 09:21 AM, Dan Connolly wrote:

>On Tue, 2007-07-17 at 18:51 -0600, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen wrote:
> > Schema documents used for validation or annotation are not always
> > mentioned explicitly in the document to be validated and cannot
> > necessarily be found by dereferencing the namespace name (since
> > the namespaces spec offers no guarantee that it can be
> > dereferenced).  Even when some schema documents CAN be found that
> > way, those are not necessarily the schema documents the user
> > wishes or needs to use.
>I don't understand why people would expect GRDDL to do
>anything with such schemas.
>In what sense should such schemas be considered part of the
>meaning of the document?
> > Users of XML Schema accustomed to using schema documents to guide
> > the annotation of document instances are likely to be surprised
> > by the failure of a spec like GRDDL to support a common use case.
>I don't think I understand what use case you have in mind at all.
>Could you elaborate, sort of in story form?
>   Bob produces a purchase order document and ...
>   Linda makes a patient record document and ...
>Preferably the story will include at least two parties: one
>that produced the document, and one that consumes it, and
>it should somehow be clear that the producer has licensed
>the data that the consumer gets out of their GRDDL agent, per
>the "Faithful Renditions" section.
>Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Jim Melton --- Editor of ISO/IEC 9075-* (SQL)     Phone: +1.801.942.0144
   Co-Chair, W3C XML Query WG; F&O (etc.) editor    Fax : +1.801.942.3345
Oracle Corporation        Oracle Email: jim dot melton at oracle dot com
1930 Viscounti Drive      Standards email: jim dot melton at acm dot org
Sandy, UT 84093-1063 USA          Personal email: jim at melton dot name
=  Facts are facts.   But any opinions expressed are the opinions      =
=  only of myself and may or may not reflect the opinions of anybody   =
=  else with whom I may or may not have discussed the issues at hand.  =
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 21:24:28 UTC

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