W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Re: #embedded-rdf4 Re: review of test cases

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 15:26:23 -0400
To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
cc: "GRDDL Working Group" <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1177961183.20756.7.camel@otherland>

On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 17:49 +0100, Jeremy Carroll wrote: 
> Oh yes, I agree that the earlier resolution isn't really valid.
> 
> I believe that the current library code deals with this correctly: by 
> ignoring the xml:base on the root element, and only doing something with 
> xml:base's lower down the tree.
> 
> Jena is passing this test.
> 
> I propose (re-)approving it.

Okay, so I'll elaborate on my previous concern with this test.  When a
GRDDL-aware agent retrieves this IR:

<!-- 
Simple test for embeddedRDF transform with reletive xml:base
-->

<embedded  
   xml:base="../.."
   xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#" 
   data-view:transformation="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/embeddedRDF.xsl">
    <a>
      <b/>
      <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	    <rdf:Description rdf:about="" rdf:value="one"/>
      </rdf:RDF>
    </a>
</embedded>

.. and parses it, the baseURI of the document will be http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/embedded-rdf4
but the baseURI of the root node will (instead be): http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/

If you apply embeddedRDF.xsl against this source you will get:

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="" xml:lang="" rdf:value="one"/>
</rdf:RDF>

Now, when you parse this RDF/XML against a baseURI of http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/ you will get the following single statement (in NTriples):

<http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/> rdf:value "one"

However, the test indicates the GRDDL result (in RDF/XML) is:

<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:data-view="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view#">
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="" 
   xml:base="../..">
    <rdf:value>one</rdf:value>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Note the xml:base on rdf:Description

If you parse *this* RDF/XML against http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/), you will get a single statement (in NTriples):

<http://www.w3.org/> rdf:value "one"


> I am also happy if we delete it, if that is the easier option.

Assuming I'm following this test correctly, this might indeed be the
easier option as we already have decent coverage for this scenario.
However, I'm curious about your thoughts.

-- 
Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
ogbujic@ccf.org






Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top 3 hospitals in
America by U.S.News & World Report. Visit us online at
http://www.clevelandclinic.org for a complete listing of
our services, staff and locations.


Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
you have received this communication in error,  please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.


===================================
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 19:26:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:49 GMT