- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 12:07:49 -0400
- To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@redhat.com>
- Cc: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>, Andrew Eisenberg <andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, w3c-xsl-query@w3.org
Jonathan Robie wrote: > > The GRDDL document suggests that XSLT is the preferred language, > because it is specifically designed for XML to XML transformations. I > haven't tried, is there a reason that XQuery is not equally good for > at least some classes of these transformations? Consider the following > paragraph: > >> Developers of transformations should make available representations >> in widely-supported formats. XSLT version 1[XSLT1] >> <http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#XSLT1> is the format most widely >> supported by GRDDL-aware agents as of this writing, though though >> XSLT2[XSLT2] <http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#XSLT2> deployment >> is increasing. While technically Javascript, C, or virtually any >> other programming language may be used to express transformations for >> GRDDL, XSLT is specifically designed to express XML to XML >> transformations and has some good safety characteristics. > > The W3C has produced two different native XML languages that both have > good safety characteristics and can do XML to XML transformations. Is > XQuery equally good for this? > > The string XQuery does not occur at all in this document, which seems > odd considering the several discussions of what language choice is > best for processing XML. XQuery is a wonderful language that has my full support, as I have mentioned to you before. However, current GRDDL implementations all currently support only XSLT 1 [1], and so we do not mention XQuery per se in the specification. However, the specification is written and the Working Group decided (issue #which-langs [2]) to allow different transformation languages, such as XQuery, to be used.. Yet as current GRDDL transformations "in the wild" (as in, before GRDDL entered W3C process) have been written in XSLT, the specificiation uses XSLT in its examples. As language use changes over time, it is a possibility that XQuery will be used for more and more GRDDL transformations, and I for one would be happy to see this, but at this point it may not necessitate a change in the specification. [1]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/test_results [2]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/issues#issue-whichlangs > Jonathan > -- -harry Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2007 16:08:02 UTC