- From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 17:34:22 -0500
- To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
At 03:06 PM 2/20/2007 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>I still think that step 2, which states "Apply each transformation to
>>obtain a GRDDL result."
>>should say something about the fact that it might not be possible to
>>apply transformations
>>if, for example, the transformation relies on software that is not
>>available -- such as awk(1)
>>on a Windows box. I suppose that most people will recognize that a GRDDL
>>agent cannot do
>>what it cannot do, but it would be nice to see some acknowledgement of
>>that fact in the
>>discussion of a what a GRDDL Agent "should" do.
>
>I think the text that Jeremy contributed touched on that... yes... well,
>something close...
>the spec currently includes...
>
>"Some implementations of the transform language may provide nonstandard
>facilities for the direct loading and execution of other programming
>language code. For example, an XSLT implementation may provide a method of
>calling Java code. Such facilities are quite obviously open to substantial
>abuse. GRDDL transforms should not make use of such features. Besides
>being totally implementation-specific, they are also likely to be
>unavailable in secure implementations of the transformation langauge."
>
>Maybe it could be adapted more directly into step 2, but I'm kinda out of
>wordsmithing energy for today.
I understand and sympathize.
Perhaps Step 2 could say:
Selectively apply any or all discovered transformations to obtain
GRDDL results.
[N.B. Selection may be guided by the agent's capabilities, local
security policies
and possibly user/client intervention.]
Does that work for everybody? Dan? Chime?
I think that it expresses just enough to be meaningful and helpful
without getting bogged down in details that are not within our remit.
Regards,
Murray
Received on Tuesday, 20 February 2007 22:32:38 UTC