W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Multiple GRDDL results in a single transform??? GRDDL and Named Graphs

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:57:17 -0500
Message-ID: <4798ED9D.2000304@ibiblio.org>
To: "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>
Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, "public-grddl-wg@w3.org" <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>, "patrick.stickler@nokia.com" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "chris@bizer.de" <chris@bizer.de>, Phil Archer <parcher@icra.org>

Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote:
> There are two separable issues here:
> 1. Whether test #grddlonrdf conforms to the GRDDL spec as written.  AFAICT it does *not* conform to the GRDDL spec as written, so in my view the working group has a responsibility in an erratum to either fix it or delete it.
Could you clarify exactly why the test violates the spec as written? I
agree, if it violates the spec then this should be noted in erratum..
> 2. Whether the GRDDL spec should be changed, to make the result of an RDF document be *only* the RDF that is directly specified in that document.  This would represent a (slight) design change, and thus it is not a candidate for an erratum.  In my view, it would have to wait until GRDDL 2.0.  :(
Likely the case, and hopefully TAG will get around to xmlFunctions-34
> 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.


Harry Halpin,  University of Edinburgh 
http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 19:58:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:52:40 UTC