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

Re: "GRDDL Agents" section, normative security text for review (# issue-conformance-labels)

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 14:27:52 -0500
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20070217141046.00ad4b18@mail.muzmo.com>
To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>

Looks quite good. The protocol trace is a nice touch.

I have a quibble with step 2....

[...] a GRDDL Agent should:

1. Find each transformation associated with N, i.e.
	[...]
2 Apply each transformation to obtain a GRDDL result.
3 Merge those GRDDL results.

I agree that an agent should be aware of each transformation that is 
associated with N.
I also agree that results should be merged.

However, I think that a GRDDL-aware agent should have some discretion
with respect to which transformation(s) are applied. Perhaps that is the
reason that "should" was used instead of "must".  In a given situation,
only one or a specific set of transformations may be applicable -- at the
discretion of the client on whose behalf the agent is performing.

Also -- I suppose that I should have thought to ask this question a long 
time ago
-- but what happens if the merged GRDDL result contains a grddl:transformation?
Is that result final, or are we expected to recurse until we have exhausted 
transformation
links?

Regards,

Murray

P.S. I noticed that my name is mentioned under acknowledgements in connection
with a W3C meeting held in France in 2004. I did attend a meeting, but it 
was in March 2006.
And thanks for the mention.
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2007 19:29:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:47 GMT