W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sparql-dev@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: rdf in xproc

From: Danh Le Phuoc <lpdanh@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 05:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
To: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>, semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>, public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Cc: ndw@nwalsh.com
Message-ID: <56946.57130.qm@web51610.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

Hi all,

i tend to agree: its best to go for a 1.0 now which is pure XML and include RDF later

from the point of view of our Open Source, Web-Visually interfaced, RDF and not only (json, xml etc) Pipeline engine [1] ,
 we have been considering using XProc as an optional syntax or intermediate block. Our solution is probably to allow a 
XProc processing block to allow people to use that power when needed and to use XProc in the backend when appropriate.

Anyway, looking forward to attempt putting all together in XProc 2.0 ?

Danh Le on behalf of the Deri Pipes team

[1] http://pipes.deri.org

----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Tyson <phtyson@sbcglobal.net>
To: semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>; public-sparql-dev@w3.org
Cc: ndw@nwalsh.com
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 4:02:11 AM
Subject: rdf in xproc

XProc [1] is in Last Call, and as it stands has no built-ins for RDF 
processing.  Do any in the community agree with me that having some 
standard pipeline facilities for RDF processing would be a good thing?

See xproc comment thread on this topic starting at [2].  The chair of 
the XProc WG will entertain proposals for a few RDF-related steps to be 
added to v1.0, and is looking to the RDF community to spec these out.

This is a request for comments on this topic.  I am also seeking 
comments on how best to pursue this (assuming there is enough interest) 
so as to provide the XProc WG with a viable proposal in a relatively 
short time.


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xproc-20080814/

Received on Saturday, 23 August 2008 12:21:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:15:50 UTC