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

Re: fixed GRDDL formal rules...

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 12:00:00 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20061107114442.07bfc8c0@mail.muzmo.com>
To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>

At 12:36 AM 11/7/2006 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
> > >[[
> > >If an information resource IR has an XML representation whose root
> > >element has a namespace name NS and for any TX, the resource identified
> > >by NS has a GRDDL result that is the merge of { ?NSDOC
> > ><http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#namespaceTransformation> ?TX } with
> > >any other RDF graphs, then TX is a GRDDL transformation of IR
> > >]]
> > >  http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#ns-bind
> > >  1.150  2006/11/05 08:56:53

Maybe it's just me, in which case I'll gladly step aside and let others
do the heavy lifting, but I still can't follow the statement above.

1) If an information resource IR has an XML representation whose root element
     has a namespace name NS

I get this. We start with an XML document with a namespace NS declared on it.

2) and for any TX,

Huh? Why "for any TX"? What does this mean? Aren't there a limited number
of TXs that pertain to that NS? I don't understand this part.

3) the resource identified by NS has a GRDDL result

Um. An NS has a GRDDL result IFF a namespaceTransformation has been nominated
and that TX returns an RDF result.

4) that is the merge of
{ ?NSDOC <http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#namespaceTransformation> ?TX }

That is the merge of its namespace Transformation

5) with any other RDF graphs,

So the NS had a TX and its graph is a merge with some other RDF graph

6) then TX is a GRDDL transformation of IR

I am lost again. How did this follow?


I am not trying to be deliberately obtuse. I simply don't follow.

Murray
Received on Tuesday, 7 November 2006 17:09:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:46 GMT