Re: Result doc validity question

On 23/09/06, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 23:10 +0200, Danny Ayers wrote:
> > I just ran into a little issue with the code I'm working on: if the
> > source doc doesn't contain any GRDDLable statements,
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/2003/12/rdf-in-xhtml-xslts/grokCC.xsl
> >
> > - produces no results, as in not XML. This trips up the subsequent
> > RDF/XML parser. It's not actually a blank doc (with the implementation
> > I'm using), it's got the <?xml... prolog.
> >
> > So there's the question of whether, assuming the target format is
> > RDF/XML, the result should be valid RDF/XML whether or not anything
> > was found. I dunno, it'd have saved me a few LOC. Thoughts?
>
> One could say that the source document is outside the dialect
> that grokCC is intended to be used with. i.e. the document
> says "I'm a document in the grokCC dialect" when it's not.
> So the bug is in the source document.
>
> On the other hand, it's not much trouble to enhance grokCC.xsl
> so that it works as you expected in more cases. So you
> could consider this a bug in grokCC.xsl.

Hmm, both seem reasonable - the first nicer in principle, the second
nicer in practice. It's not a pressing point, but I guess worth
bearing in mind when it comes to testing.

Cheers,
Danny.

-- 

http://dannyayers.com

Received on Thursday, 28 September 2006 09:32:52 UTC