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

Re: Some spec comments (to .xsl or not to .xsl?) (#issue-whichlangs, #issue-conformance-labels)

From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 14:49:58 -0500 (EST)
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, "McBride, Brian" <brian.mcbride@hp.com>, GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.60.0702201438420.20412@joplin.bio.ri.ccf.org>

On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Dan Connolly wrote:

> I can't tell if you're serious or not. In case you are...

I was..

> The spec currently (1.226) says
>
> "A GRDDL-aware agent should... Find each transformation... Apply each 
> transformation..."
> so yes, it has a SHOULD-level obligation to apply the javascript; meanwhile, 
> that bit of the spec
> follows "Subject to ... local policy as expressed in its configuration ..." 
> and it's pretty
> clear to me that "I don't do javascript" is a reasonable policy, especially 
> given
> our position on #issue-whichlangs...

Since the idea of a 'local policy' is pretty loose (theoretically, one 
such policy could be to *not* apply *any* transforms at all) does it 
render the conformance label moot - as it is currently written?  Consider 
that such a policy would result in 'no' GRDDL result(s) for an IR which is *supposed* to have one 
or more.

> "Developers of transformations should make available representations in 
> widely-supported formats. XSLT version 1[XSLT1] 
> <http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#XSLT1> is the format most widely 
> supported by GRDDL-aware agents as of this writing, though though 
> XSLT2[XSLT2] <http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#XSLT2> deployment is 
> increasing. While technically Javascript, C, or virtually any other 
> programming language may be used to express transformations for GRDDL, XSLT 
> is specifically designed to express XML to XML transformations and has some 
> good safety characteristics."
> -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#txforms

This is a pretty clear health warning IMHO.  It is the conformance 
mandate that confuses things, it seems, as they are applied within the 
context of open-ended policies.

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
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 19:50:12 GMT

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