on dave beckett's comments

a) we can carry comments against the test cases forward into last call, 
in particular, his latest comment
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0012
is about the tests and the library.

b) there are sections of his message
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0003
which have not been addressed.
These are editorial in nature, and I suggest that we include addressing 
these editorial comments in as part of our resolution to move the spec 
to CR.

Specifically:
S2
[bug] addressed
S3
[words]
not addressed yet.
I suggest:
old
[[
To associate a GRDDL transformation with a whole dialect, have the 
namespace document include the grddl:namespaceTransformation property.
]]
new
[[
To associate a GRDDL transformation with a whole dialect, have the 
namespace document include the grddl:namespaceTransformation property,
either within an RDF namespace document, or as a GRDDL result of a
namespace document.
]]

S4
[note]
"whitespace-separation of terms is defined by HTML4"
I suggest no action.

[bug]
closed:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/2007AprJun/0009

S7
[comment]
"The long example in this section could be marked informative."
I suggest replying noting that we only mark normative text.
Perhaps that convention should be made explicit.
e.g.
in the SOTD say
<span class="norm">Normative material is marked up in this way.</span>

S9
[spelling: vocabulary] (not Vocuabulary)


S Appendix
[comment]
"suggest this is deleted, or made informative"
would be addressed by making explicit that it is informative.




-- 
Hewlett-Packard Limited
registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England