- From: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:46:08 +0200
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>, Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>, Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Le jeudi 14 septembre 2006 à 20:34 -0500, Dan Connolly a écrit : > On Sep 13, 2006, at 11:29 AM, Fabien Gandon wrote: > > As discussed in the previous telecon [1] one of the two outstanding > > issues to resolve before going to draft status > > for the Use Case Document is the question raised by the technical > > solution proposed in the XML Schema Use Case [2]: > > > > What is the technical solution proposed to enable the creator of an > > XML Schema to specify the profile and GRDDL transformations associated > > with each one of the instance documents of this schema? > > I don't see the issue here. This is just a normal application > of the way GRDDL works with namespace documents. But this is only true if the namespace of the root element can be dereferenced to the said XML Schema. In particular, this doens't take into accounts the cases where the Schema creator doesn't have access to the namespace document, or the cases where the schema add further restrictions to the ones that would be true for all the documents with such a root namespace. There were (inconclusive) discussions at some point to know whether GRDDL should also follow e.g. xsi:schemaLocation: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2004Dec/0041.html I don't have a strong opinion on it; I'm not sure how many hooks would be too many for GRDDL. Dom
Received on Friday, 15 September 2006 06:59:49 UTC