- From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 00:05:17 -0500
- To: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
At 06:41 PM 12/18/2006 -0500, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: [...] Without an explicit pipeline, there is no way to guarantee or mandate an appropriate set of XML processing operations before the XML infoset is created for transformation via GRDDL. And if the author *chooses* to use XInclude operations within the source document then he/she had better use a pipleline to ensure the proper XML infoset is created for the subsequent GRDDL transform algorithm otherwise he/she cannot guarantee a 'faithful rendition'. The fact that *some* XML processors can handle XInclude implicitely and other can't is evidence of this. There is no way to make a guarantee in the general case. Within a mandated computer environment, such as I imagine are in places like the Cleveland Clinic and other organizations where messaging is mission critical, it would certainly be possible. Moreover, it would be practical to establish policies within GRDDL-aware processors to insist that all documents be fully expanded and have all XIncludes resolved before running the nominated transformation. That just seems like a rational policy if you want to extract information from a document that might contain transcluded information. In other words, the spec doesn't preclude making a guarantee, it just pushes the assertion of such a guarantee up to the application layer.
Received on Tuesday, 19 December 2006 05:11:52 UTC