- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:29:30 -0600
- To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 11:56 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
> i.e. they answer "yes" to today's poll.
Harry asked for somebody to elaborate on the XSLT literal
result element case, which I gave as a reason to answer "no".
So... see
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/litres.xml
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/litres
Here's a copy to pore over...
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
xsl:version="1.0"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>
<rdf:Description rdf:about="">
<rdfs:seeAlso
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#result-element-stylesheet" />
<rdfs:seeAlso
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlFunctions-34" />
<rdfs:seeAlso
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#nsMediaType-3" />
<dc:description>The start tag of the root element
of this document seems to say that it's an RDF/XML document.
But it also says that it's an XSLT literal result element.
And the element after this one doesn't parse as RDF/XML.
But after you run it thru an XSLT processor, the result
*is* RDF/XML. So when it's served up as application/xml,
what GRDDL results does it have, if any?
</dc:description>
<dc:description>
<xsl:value-of select="2+2" />
</dc:description>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 1 November 2006 18:29:49 UTC