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

RE: #issue-whichlangs editorial tweak

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 18:05:16 -0600
To: "McBride, Brian" <brian.mcbride@hp.com>
Cc: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1164845116.3997.1373.camel@dirk>

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 15:44 +0000, McBride, Brian wrote:
[...]
> 2. Where do we stand on multiple transform languages?

In the phone call today, I went over the relevant text with
Brian and noticed that it said "transformations should
be available..." which suggests that transformations
have some choice in the matter.

I made this change...

http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#changes
Revision 1.166  2006/11/29 23:41:05  connolly
in discussion of transformation formats, make
it clear who the "should" applies to, and
use "GRDDL processor" from the glossary
rather than "consumer".

resulting in...

[[
Developers of transformations should make available representations in
widely-supported formats. XSLT version 1[XSLT1] is the format most
widely supported by GRDDL processors as of this writing, though though
XSLT2[XSLT2] deployment is increasing.
]]

Normally I'd just make a change like this without any special
notice, but our 30 Aug #issue-whichlangs decision referred to
the specific text in the spec...

RESOLUTION: to address [#issue-whichlangs] as per the current draft
(1.83 2006/08/25 20:23:09). SHOULD support XSLT 1; MAY support others.

so in some sense, I'm re-opening that decision.

The chair might choose to have the WG explicitly confirm that
this change is editorial and doesn't impact the decision we made,
though I suggest it's not necessary; this notice is probably
sufficient. I'm inclined to take silence as agreement.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 00:05:25 GMT

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