W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > July to September 2008


From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 21:45:35 +0200
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd0808061245i24859170g4db0ae29ec8fc55b@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org
Hey Ian,

First of all let me express appreciation for your consideration of this
issue (whoever "you" might be ;).

I haven't been following the HTML list(s) adequately to comment on Dan's
process points, but the notion of adding rel="transformation" as a baked-in
rel option does appear to have potential for bridging between the objectives
of HTML5 and GRDDL 1.x. (While admittedly I still see no technical
advantages over straight URI-based extensibility).

Harry is certainly right that this idea could use some testing.

One possible obstacle might be how to specify the purpose of the linked
transformation. I can't (yet?) see how the usual type="..." hint and
explicit Content-Type header could say what kind of transformation appears
at the target of the link, and what kind of processing & result is
expected/returned (i.e. the bits that come relatively cost-effective with


Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 19:46:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:55:03 UTC