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


From: Story Henry <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:57:49 +0200
Message-Id: <E4202F1D-CC60-48E1-B37D-C011888995E8@bblfish.net>
Cc: webmaster@kanzaki.cc, Powell David <djpowell@djpowell.net>, Beckett Dave <dave@dajobe.org>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org
To: Ayers Danny <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, atom-owl@googlegroups.com

On 22 Aug 2007, at 16:31, Danny Ayers wrote:

> [cc'ing public-grddl-comments@w3.org]
> Hi,
> The GRDDL Working Group [1] is looking for an XSLT transformation
> which will convert Atom format to RDF/XML. It's hoped that if a
> suitable one is found/written, the Atom WG will be willing for it to
> be associated with the Atom namespace document, enabling GRDDL-aware
> agents to automatically interpret Atom data as RDF. Please note that
> this hasn't yet been raised with atompub, it was felt better to have
> the XSLT available first (along with anything else that might improve
> the case, like tests).
> The current intention is for the XSLT file to be hosted on a W3C
> server, available under the W3C license [2].
> The GRDDL WG would very much appreciate your opinions on this  
> matter, e.g.
> * What criteria do you believe the XSLT should fulfil?
> * Are any of these existing versions suitable, or do we need a new  
> one?
> * Do you have any suggestions for tests etc?
> (Dave, I don't know if you've done an XSLT, but your work on Atom &
> RSS 1.0 around Raptor suggests your opinion would be valuable).
> Henry, I believe your current version [3] requires XSLT 2.0 - for
> GRDDL purposes this limits its applicability.

It can also use XQuery. Both of the transforms are here:

There is an old xslt1.0 translation, but I did not develop it  
further, because
I found it a lot easier to work with XQuery. The XQuery is then  
translated to

> David, I couldn't find
> your latest version...[4] was nearest. So Masahide, yours [5]
> currently looks most promising. It would be helpful if everyone could
> confirm their licensing situation.

It is a BSD licence pretty much. But it can be changed if needed.

> An open question is the target vocabularies to which the XSLT should
> translate. (If I remember correctly, Henry's is a new Atom-specific
> vocab, David's mostly RSS 1.0 based, Masahide's RSS 1.0 augmented with
> Atom-specific terms).

The AtomOwl is designed to make the N3 look as close to the atom xml  
as possible,
so as to work well with atom xml people's intuitions. There are  
perhaps a few
more things to iron out... I would be happy to finish things off  
formally and give
it a trusted name space. In any case it is BSD so it can be taken...

One piece that is still missing are some vocabulary enhancements from  
the Atom Publishing

A quick look at Masahide's ontology, and I would guess that he will  
have a problem with
atom feeds with multiple entries with the same id. Since I don't  
think those map well to

> Are the differences between Atom & RSS 1.0 such that some/all of the
> later would be too much of a compromise? Or are some/all of the terms
> near enough that the value of term reuse more than compensates for
> minor differences?

I wrote something on this a long time ago. A good place to start the  
discussion perhaps.


One thing that could be added to AtomOwl would be a mapping of  
relations to well known ontologies such as Dublin Core.

> Cheers,
> Danny.
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/2002/copyright- 
> software-20021231
> [3] http://bblfish.net/work/atom-owl/2006-06-06/AtomOwl.html
> [4] http://groups.google.com/group/atom-owl/browse_thread/thread/ 
> 531cc3843cb9b613/6eca2a25902a02c9? 
> lnk=gst&q=xslt&rnum=3#6eca2a25902a02c9
> [5] http://www.kanzaki.com/works/2005/misc/0726atom.html
> -- 
> http://dannyayers.com
Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2007 14:58:52 UTC

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