- From: Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) <dbooth@hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:01:53 -0400
- To: "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: "GRDDL Working Group" <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>, <ogbujic@ccf.org>, "Clark, John" <CLARKJ2@ccf.org>
> From: Dan Connolly [mailto:connolly@w3.org] > [ . . . ] > > - It would not require any test case changes. > > Odd; your first observation means that at least one test > changes: > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/grddl-wg/td/grddl-tests#xinclude No. If the GRDDL transformation is written in XSLT (as they are in these examples), then the ambiguity is merely shifted into the GRDDL transformation, so the test results would remain the same. Of course, the point of shifting the responsibility to the GRDDL transformation is that it *permits* the GRDDL transformation to be unambiguous if it *chooses*, perhaps by using XProc instead of XSLT. David Booth, Ph.D. HP Software +1 617 629 8881 office | dbooth@hp.com http://www.hp.com/go/software Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not represent the official views of HP unless explicitly stated otherwise.
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 01:02:25 UTC