- From: Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>
- Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 12:03:00 +0200
- To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- CC: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Thank you for your review Murray,
I am integrating it right now.
Just a question below.
Murray Maloney:
> GRDDL Use Cases
> ==============
> (...)
> I have difficulty reconciling the use of the term "GRDDL Source Document"
> with the supposed act of gleaning resource descriptions. The use of GRDDL
> as a descriptor or qualifier prefix belies the fact that most of these
> documents
> have a much broader function and applicability than just GRDDL. Surely my
> home page is not a GRDDL document per se. It may identify itself as a
> candidate for transformation, or it may be identified as such by virtue of
> its document element's membership in a namespace or HTML profile,
> but that doesn't make it a GRDDL source document. In my opinion,
> as a reader. Certainly the term "source document" applies, as does the
> term "GRDDL fodder."
If I understand you well you would prefer something like:
"GRDDLable document"
"GRDDL-compliant document"
"GRDDL-candidate source document"
--
"never judge a book by its movie."
-- J.W. Eagan.
____________
|__ _ |_ http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/personnel/Fabien.Gandon/
| (_||_) INRIA Sophia Antipolis - ph# (33)(0)4 92 38 77 88
Received on Wednesday, 27 September 2006 10:04:52 UTC