- From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 17:22:02 -0400
- To: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>,public-grddl-comments@w3.org, public-grddl-wg@w3.org
> >Ok. How would the OWL WG encourage GRDDL agent authors to include the >transform *without* providing an executable? Is there any sense to >this at all? Yes and no. I have had trouble understanding your notion of a GRDDL Transformation that is not executable. By way of background, please consider the following fundamental statement from the introduction to GRDDL: ============================================= Faithful Renditions By specifying a GRDDL transformation, the author of a document states that the transformation will provide a faithful rendition in RDF of information (or some portion of the information) expressed through the XML dialect used in the source document. Likewise, by specifying a GRDDL namespace transformation or profile transformation, the creator of that namespace or profile states that the transformation will provide a faithful RDF rendition of a class of source documents which relate to that namespace or profile. A namespace document or a profile document also provide a means for their authors to explain in prose the purpose of the transformation or any policy statements. ============================================= I can imagine a scenario in which the GRDDL Transformation is a text document which describes in excruciating detail how a human being or software could parse the contents of the XML document and produce an RDF document that satisfies the faithful rendition promise. So, yes, you could use a non-executable to yield an RDF rendition. But it doesn't seem very satisfying. Obviously I am missing something important. To what do you imagine linking, if not an executable transformation? Could you please provide an example of a document or document class to which you would wish to apply a GRDDL transform without pointing to an executable, an example of what you would point to, and an example result that you would expect in consequence? I'd like to understand what you are asking, but the conversation has been at the wrong altitude for me. Murray
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:20:51 UTC