- From: Norman Gray <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 12:20:17 +0000
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Cc: public-grddl-comments@w3.org
Harry, hello. On 2007 Jan 9 , at 04.22, Harry Halpin wrote: > We've added a use-case to the GRDDL Use-Case document[1] that we > believe addresses both the use of GRDDL transformations on non-XML > HTML > (i.e., as you rightly pointed out, how it is possible) and then > presents > the case for why XML (XHTML) is preferred. > > Tell us if you find it satisfactory! http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc43/scenario- gallery.htm#html_tidy_use_case The case I'm pushing was the first one mentioned there, `If the tidying is simple (e.g. a <BR> is replaced by a <BR/>)'. That seems to cover the case where the author intends a document to be GRDDLed, but for one reason or other (because a tool hiccups, say, or because the author wants to target HTML 3.2) they don't produce well-formed XML. Myself, I'm rather nervous about the suggestion that `The script also systematically calls some classic transformations on the document in case these were not explicitly referenced in the page'. That strikes me as a tool being too clever for its own good. It also sits oddly with the usecase's talk of `licensing a transformation'. If I don't put in a GRDDL declaration, then I am not licensing any transformation at all, and if you happen to find a GRDDL script that will produce output, that's nothing to do with me, and I can't be held responsible for it. Perhaps there are three cases here: 1. I (as an author) produce well-formed XML and a GRDDL declaration. I license a transformation, and expect/require you to get all of the metadata (that is, if there were a CreativeCommons licence statement in the GRDDLed RDF, then you can't deny having seen it). 2. I produce mildly ill-formed XML and a GRDDL declaration. I license any transformation, but if you don't bother, or try and fail (for one of the reasons mentioned in the usecase), then I can't object. You're allowed to rely on any RDF you extract, but if that RDF is incorrect, then it's my fault, and I'm still held to it. 3. I produce well- or ill-formed XML and no GRDDL declaration. You can do what you like, but I didn't license the transformation, and you can't blame me for any libellous remarks you deduce. Scraping isn't pretty -- I don't see any real need for GRDDL to go this far. The distinction between (1) and (2) was what I was getting at in the suggested text in [1]. The `see also' at the end links to JTidy; you might also want to add <http://home.ccil.org/~cowan/XML/tagsoup/> All the best Norman [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-comments/ 2006OctDec/0031.html -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- Norman Gray / http://nxg.me.uk eurovotech.org / University of Leicester, UK
Received on Tuesday, 9 January 2007 12:20:32 UTC