There are 3 different proposals: PROPOSAL 1c changes the domain of a transformation from an XPath node tree to the original XML document representation. Normative changes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0331.html Informative changes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0360.html PROPOSAL 2d extends 1c to use non-validating parsing in determining what transformations to apply. This proposal most fully addresses the ambiguity issue. Normative changes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0355.html Informative changes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0359.html PROPOSAL 3c (compromise) makes only informative changes to clearly indicate that GRDDL implementations are expected to conform to the W3C TAG issue xmlFunctions-34 resolution and the XProc definition of a default processing model if issued. Changes: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0333.html David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com http://www.hp.com/go/software Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise.Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 06:22:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:50 GMT