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

Re: Xinclude test case

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 18:41:11 -0500 (EST)
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
cc: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0612181838220.16578@joplin.bio.ri.ccf.org>

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Harry Halpin wrote:
> 2) We don't, and therefore say that if you want to make sure your
> XIncludes get resolved, use XMLProc or another Pipeline implementation.
> Otherwise you have to hope for the best.

Having had a chance to think about this one, I'm inclined to conclude that 
option 2 makes the most pragmatic sense for this WG.  Without an explicit 
pipeline, there is no way to guarantee or mandate an appropriate set of 
XML processing operations before the XML infoset is created for 
transformation via GRDDL.  And if the author *chooses* to use XInclude 
operations within the source document then he/she had better use a 
pipleline to ensure the proper XML infoset is created for the subsequent 
GRDDL transform algorithm otherwise he/she cannot guarantee a 'faithful 
rendition'.  The fact that *some* XML processors can handle XInclude 
implicitely and other can't is evidence of this.

Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 23:41:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:39:09 UTC