- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:01:27 -0500
- To: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org>
- Cc: public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 15:02 -0400, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote: > 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: > [...] 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? Indeed. The schema/ontology in the namespace document needs to go in the spec too. I added a TODO in v1.89 so I/we don't forget. http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec > 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 -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2006 23:01:38 UTC