W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > December 2006

XPROC and the XINCLUDE issue

From: McBride, Brian <brian.mcbride@hp.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 03:17:25 -0000
Message-ID: <86FE9B2B91ADD04095335314BE6906E8AC844A@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>

We had a useful discussion at last Wednesday's call.  Since then I've
had a look at the XPROC spec and I think I may now agree with Murray.

I expect we will have several test cases.  Here is one.  It is a
negative test case.  The result document is not a GRDDL result of the
input document.

Input Document:

<foo xmlns="http://example.org/ns#"   
     xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#"
     data-view:transformation="foo.xsl" />

Transform:

<xsl:transform
  xmlns:xsl  ="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"  version="1.0"
  xmlns:rdf  ="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
  xmlns:ex   ="http://example.org"
  >

<xsl:output method="xml" indent="yes"/>

<xsl:template match="/">
  <rdf:RDF>
    <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/foo">
      <ex:bar1>bar1</ex:bar1>
      <ex:bar2>bar2</ex:bar2>    
  </rdf:RDF>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:transform>

The following is NOT a GRDDL result of the input document:

<rdf:RDF
  xmlns:rdf  ="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
  xmlns:ex   ="http://example.org">
    <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/foo">
      <ex:bar1>bar1</ex:bar1> 
    </rdf:Description> 
</rdf:RDF>



[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc/
Received on Saturday, 16 December 2006 03:17:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:47 GMT