Re: GRDDL and OWL/XML

On May 13, 2008, at 6:08 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> Bijan Parsia wrote:
>
>>>> People are reading the SHOULD as a MUST.
>>>
>>> Really? I am not.
>
> To try to echo your argument about SHOULD
>
> SHOULD means that we MUST have to have a good motivations for not  
> doing so and MUST understand the ramifications of the decision.
>
> The good motivation is:
> - to not confuse OWL/XML document authors and/or implementors as to  
> what is the normative definition of the language
[I think this is a reasonable variant.]
> Ramifications are:
> - OWL/XML will not be automatically readable by XSLT aware GRDDL  
> agents, but they will need to have special support.

Where the special support might be selecting and downloading a third  
party XSLT, yes.

> And in your judgement the 'good motivation' outweighs the  
> 'ramification'.

I certainly think that this is good enough for outweighing the  
SHOULD, yes.

> Have I expressed it about right?

Pace complications, yes.

Cheers,
Bijan.