- From: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 20:07:40 -0700
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- CC: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Jeremy Carroll wrote: > Copied from WG list, should also have been on the comments list. > > Dave Beckett's comments preceded by >> > WG responce preceded by > > > Harry Halpin wrote: >> Sent on behalf of the WG, text by member Jeremy Carroll: >> Hi Dave >> >>> Are the contents you get when resolving the URI >>> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view part of the GRDDL recommendation? >> >>> If so, I'd expect the contents to be static and could be hard-coded >>> into applications. If not static, what are the expected changes? >>> (Given that above the only allowed changes are defined to not affect >>> GRDDL processing). >> >>> The GRDDL profile URI is a significant URI for the GRDDL >>> specification, so this is why I want to check if there is >>> anything special going on with it's use and any contents >>> that it may contain. >> >> >> To reply directly: >> a) No, the content of http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view are not part >> of the GRDDL recommendation? >> b) We will review and correct the contents of >> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view during the candidate recommendation >> phase (which we hope will be from May 1st to June 1st), after which it >> should be stable. We will update you when we have done this. >> c) Applications can behave as if the file had an empty GRDDL result, >> except when they are explicitly asked for the GRDDL result of this >> resource. In the latter case, they should do a GET on the URI and apply >> the usually GRDDL mechanisms. >> >> This is the force of the statement in the editor's draft: >> [[ >> The namespace document includes RDF data about the terms in the GRDDL >> Vocuabulary, but these RDF data do not include any triples whose >> predicate is grddl:profileTransformation. >> ]] >> http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#grddlvocab >> >> since that is the only type of triple that one would normally have to >> look for. >> >> Does this adequately address your concerns about the namespace document? >> >> =========== >> >> Jeremy >> Yes it does address my concerns. Thanks Dave
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 03:07:57 UTC