Re: Review of GRDDL Documents and Issues

Thanks, done, see v1.36 of
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/doc43/scenario-gallery.htm

Murray Maloney a écrit :
> At 12:03 PM 9/27/2006 +0200, Fabien Gandon wrote:
>
>> If I understand you well you would prefer something like:
>> "GRDDLable document"
>> "GRDDL-compliant document"
>> "GRDDL-candidate source document"
>
> Actually, the neutral terms "source document" or "input document" 
> would be great.
>
> These terms would apply equally to a document that is a candidate as 
> well as it
> would to a document that was not a candidate. I observe that it would 
> be possible
> for a document living on my file system to be a candidate because I 
> have cached
> copies of the namespace or HTML profile, while another GRDDL-aware 
> processor
> might not recognize that document's candidacy because it did not have 
> access
> to my namespace or profile. My point being that a document's 
> suitability for GRDDL
> processing can be ephemeral and context-dependent. Therefore it is 
> just another
> source or input document until it encounters a GRDDL-aware processor that
> recognizes it as a candidate for GRDDL processing.
>
> These are also terms which are applicable to an XML Pipeline and its 
> subordinate
> steps and components.
>
> Regards,
>
> Murray

-- 
"The dose makes the poison." 
             -- Paracelsus.
 ____________
|__ _ |_  http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/personnel/Fabien.Gandon/
|  (_||_) INRIA Sophia Antipolis - ph# (33)(0)4 92 38 77 88