- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:55:06 +0100
- To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Danny Ayers wrote: > But what about > if there was a long doc and a timeout on the processor, so in certain > circumstances only a subset of the full graph was produced - the > function has another input, time. Partial fulfilment of the request > could well be useful, but strictly speaking is unacceptable. My guess would be then that this particular concern is out of scope and implementation dependent, as we can't guarantee people's processors working. > My concerns may be off the mark, or just totally irrational, but > something makes me itch with the idea of the XSLT processor (or > Javascript interpreter, whatever) being implicit in the chain. However, as I put out earlier in response to Liam's concern - if you have say, a URI at the end of transform link that ends with the "rdf/xml" type, then there's no reason not to just "use it" instead of process it. So no processor in the chain in that regard. Again - that use-case is sheer speculation - I still think we should stick to XSLT 1.0 for SHOULD. Unless anyone else likes the "rdf/xml" type. > Cheers, > Danny. > -- -harry Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Tuesday, 29 August 2006 19:55:12 UTC