W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > August 2008

Re: GRDDL (and the rule of least power)

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 19:16:47 +0300
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, Justin James <j_james@mindspring.com>, public-html@w3.org
Message-Id: <1A4D97ED-4562-4C48-B877-22C7D3B99543@iki.fi>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>

-public-html +www-archive

On Aug 6, 2008, at 18:50, Dan Connolly wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-08-06 at 11:12 +0300, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> [...]
>>>> I'm not sure if abusing HTML is the right characterization, but the
>>>> GRDDL setup violates the The Rule of Least Power TAG Finding.
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/leastPower
>>> I'm not sure how using XSLT 1.0 violates that finding (please
>>> elaborate);
>> XSLT is in a more powerful language category than (scriptless) HTML  
>> or
>> any of the notations for RDF triples.
> But XSLT is not being used to express hypertext documents
> nor RDF graphs; it is being used to express a transformation
> from one syntax to another.

The result is, though, that even if the program is a pure  
transformation that doesn't have any additional data embedded into it,  
the consumer gets the simple data only by executing the foreign program.

If I send a TIFF inside PostScript program that renders it, I'm  
sending a bitmap in a sense, but the recipient still has to run a  
foreign program to get it.

> GRDDL is only violating
> the rule of least power to the extent that it uses a
> turing-complete language where something simpler would do.

Isn't that all there is to violate about the rule?

Henri Sivonen
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 16:26:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:36 UTC