- 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