Re: What about XQuery? (#issue-whichlangs, #issue-conformance-labels, #issue-output-formats)

Dan Connolly wrote:
>
> A few paragraphs later, after giving the formal rule for the XSLT
> case, we say...
>
> "Non-XSLT transforms may indicate the RDF graph in some other,
> unspecified, fashion."
>
> Perhaps that's what you're looking for?
>
> The actual conformance clause for a GRDDL-aware agent is later
> in the document; the relevant part is:
>
> "a GRDDL-aware agent should ...
> Find each transformation ...
> Selectively apply any or all discovered transformations to obtain GRDDL
> results. Note selection may be guided by the agent's capabilities, local
> security policies and possibly user/client intervention."
>
> i.e. GRDDL-aware agents may support any transformation language(s).
> How XSLT works is fully specified. All the test cases and
> examples the WG provides are XSLT, because that's all we have experience
> with, but we leave open the possibility of agents that support
> other languages.
>
> Is that satisfactory?
>
>
> For reference, the relevant WG decisions and issues are:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/issues#issue-conformance-labels
> resolved 2007-02-21 to have a conformance clause for GRDDL-aware
> agents as above.
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/issues#issue-whichlangs
> resolved 2006-08-30 to recommend XSLT and allow other transformation
> languages
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/issues#issue-output-formats
> resolved 6 Dec 2006-12-06 to specify the XSLT case completely
>   


Yes, this is satisfactory. (I might prefer to move the statement that 
other languages are not specified to the paragraph I quoted, but that's 
editorial and a matter of taste.)

Thanks!

Jonathan