- From: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:02:19 -0400 (EDT)
- To: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Dan Connolly wrote: > On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 09:19 -0400, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: >> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Dan Connolly wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 08:23 -0400, Harry Halpin wrote: >>> ... snip ... >>> The way I would probably phrase it in the spec is to say >>> that the grddl:transformation property relates a document >>> to an algorithm whose input is XML >>> and whose output is RDF abstract syntax. >> >> I very much like this compromise (much more so than mandating RDF/XML >> explicitely knowing fully well that there are several other alternative >> syntaxes with significant critical mass), my only additions would be: >> >> 1. To speak of the 'associated' GRDDL transformation algorithm directly >> rather than say the grddl:transformation property relates ... (only because there are >> additional ways an algorithm can be associated with the source) > > What additional ways? Aren't they all ways of expressing > an RDF statement whose property is grddl:transformation? > I suppose the spec hasn't been clear about that so far. Hmm. Nope, it isn't. Clear for the author perhaps. See my earlier email [1] about what exactly are the specific RDF properties that relate sources to transforms. Sure, we have 'informal' schema/ontology at the namespace URL, but why not include it in the specification or refer to it explicitely? I generally do not see the value in leaving descriptions of important mechanisms (such as this) cryptic. You don't have to be redundant to be clear. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Sep/0070.html Chimezie Ogbuji Lead Systems Analyst Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Cleveland Clinic Foundation 9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26 Cleveland, Ohio 44195 Office: (216)444-8593 ogbujic@ccf.org
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 19:02:28 UTC