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: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:59:37 -0600
Message-Id: <4282096A-5C4C-4AB8-AE93-F4AFCF8FEEC9@acm.org>
Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Andrew Eisenberg <andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, w3c-xsl-query@w3.org
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>

On 18 Jul 2007, at 16:08 , Harry Halpin wrote:

> An aside, although the official response will come from Dan himself.
> The reason GRDDL does not use third-party schemas is because it  
> already has a mechanism (for both XHTML and XML) for pointing to  
> third-party transformations. Since the only reason GRDDL uses  a  
> schema at the namespace URI is to find a transformation (as it uses  
> no other part of the schema), it seems reasonable to assume that if  
> a  schema is somewhere else rather than at a namespace URI, then  
> the user can simply directly point to the transformation given by  
> the "third-party" schema. This keeps indirection to minimum.

So if I have a few thousand, or a few hundred thousand, documents
in the same vocabulary, and use a schema for that vocabulary which
is not at the namespace name but which is accessible to my processes,
the advice of the GRDDL group is not to document the transformation
in the schema document, but to edit each document and add an
explicit link to the GRDDL transformation for that vocabulary?
Given that the semantics are associated with the vocabulary,
and the annotations for the vocabulary are documented in the
schema document I use -- and given that there's no particular
technical difficulty involved here, that I can see -- why would
I as a document owner want to incur that kind of cost and
introduce that kind of redundancy?

--C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Received on Wednesday, 18 July 2007 23:59:43 UTC

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