RE: Atom to N3 XSLT for #issue-output-formats

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 17:05 -0500, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
> > The GRDDL spec is currently silent (except for examples) on how
> > you get from a hunk of XSLT to an algorithm that goes from
> > XML nodesets to RDF graphs. It introduces "transform property"
> > to relate them, but does not go as far as a normative reference
> > to XSLT to say exactly how it works:
> >
> > [[
> > If an information resource IR has a GRDDL transformation whose
> > transformation property TP, applied to the XML root node from a
> > representation of IR, gives an RDF Graph G, then G is a GRDDL result of
> > IR.
> > ]]
> >
> 
> Well I think a simple normative reference (nothing more than a link even) 
> to the XSLT specification should suffice.

do you mean informative? The spec does have an informative reference.
 http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#XSLT1

But there's no normative dependency, per our decision
on issue#whichlangs .


>   Really, how the 
> algorithm is 'applyied' should be referred to only (within 
> the appropriate location of the transformation algorithm spec: XSLT in this 
> case).  Otherwise, I would think it would be enough to say that the 
> result of the transformation must be a valid (syntactically) RDF Graph.

That would be like saying "2 + 2 MUST be 4". It just _is_ 4.
 (see "must is for agents" http://www.w3.org/2001/01/mp23 , which
  I should perhaps integrate into http://esw.w3.org/topic/QA/ )

> Although, you can infer that if it has to be 'an RDF Graph' then it must 
> be a syntactically valid RDF serialization.

Right. And actually, there's no requirement to serialize the RDF at all.
The spec just says the transformation produces an RDF graph.



-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2006 22:29:59 UTC