- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:09:08 -0400
- To: "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, "Jonathan Robie" <jonathan.robie@redhat.com>
- Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@acm.org>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>, "Andrew Eisenberg" <andrew.eisenberg@us.ibm.com>, <public-grddl-comments@w3.org>, <w3c-xsl-query@w3.org>, "Ogbuji, Chimezie" <OGBUJIC@ccf.org>
Harry, I think you have to be careful here: > From: public-grddl-comments-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-grddl-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of > Harry Halpin > [ . . . ] > [For example, a GRDDL-aware agent may have a > security policy that prevents it from accessing GRDDL transformations > located in untrusted domain names, it may be unable to apply > transformations given in a language it does not support, and it may > feature additional non-normative capabilities such as allowing > transformations to be found in schemas not specified at the namespace > document.] > [ . . . ] The problem with that wording is: Are the results still going to be a Faithful Rendition of the original XML document? If the GRDDL-aware agent is permitted to apply transformations that the GRDDL spec cannot ensure were endorsed by the XML document author, then the GRDDL spec cannot ensure that the RDF results do represent a Faithful Rendition. David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com http://www.hp.com/go/software Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Received on Friday, 27 July 2007 01:11:56 UTC