- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:11:41 +0000
- To: public-grddl-comments@w3.org
- CC: Dave Beckett <dave@dajobe.org>
- Message-ID: <45E58D9D.1030907@hpl.hp.com>
Summary: current spec is fine on profile document. It could explicitly
say that the GRDDL profile does not have a profileTransformation, hence
licensing not reading the GRDDL profile ever.
>> In the end I had to exclude it because the GRDDL profile document
>> http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view contains an erdf profile, which
>> refers to the GRDDL profile, so when you follow the natural
>> evaluation order, you end up in a loop, or if like me, you were
>> checking for urls already visited, the process terminated without
>> having generated any triples at all.
Seeing that Dan had a flag about this in the editors draft I thought I
would see what my code does.
Fairly similarly to Dave, my code does not traverse the GRDDL profile:
The relevant code is:
if (PROFILE.equals(p[i]) || NAMESPACE.equals(p[i]))
grddlProfile = true;
else
checkProfile(input.resolve(p[i]));
(Note: I liberally allow a misspelling of the profile, with a # on the end).
I tried editing it to
if (PROFILE.equals(p[i]) || NAMESPACE.equals(p[i]))
grddlProfile = true;
checkProfile(input.resolve(p[i]));
Everything worked fine still.
The loop avoidance policy I use is:
I have a look-up table of URI->Graph for everything I have read.
(this one day might become a SW cache)
Before reading a new document, I look it up.
If it is in the 'cache' then I do nothing.
If it isn't I enter an empty graph into the cache, and then populate
the graph with the GRDDL results.
Because I enter the unpopulated graph into the cache before populating
it, it avoids loops.
In particular, when reading an HTML document, and traversing the GRDDL
profile, I find the attached graphs for both the GRDDL profile and
for the ERDF profile.
In summary: no changes are required to the specification for this issue.
Jeremy
PS I seem to be failing more tests than Dave at the moment. I am
concentrating on the security parts for now. I don't think I'll be able
to look at test cases for a few weeks.
Attachments
Received on Wednesday, 28 February 2007 14:12:28 UTC