- From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:13:37 -0400
- To: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>, public-grddl-wg <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Murray Maloney wrote: > > At 11:46 AM 6/19/2007 -0400, Harry Halpin wrote: > >> Before proposing any alternative solutions, I would write the Note and >> specify *all* (including non-normative) spec changes your first proposal >> recommends before writing a second proposal. >> >> The option of reducing variability by *not permitting* Xinclude >> resolution by the transformation language or the GRDDL-aware agent would >> require re-opening our decision on #faithful-infoset, which the current >> proposal in my opinion does not require. At this late stage, I am >> against re-opening previous WG decisions unless there is very strong >> feeling by more than one member of the WG, and preferably WG consensus. > > There is not consensus on the suggested change. I am strongly opposed. > This proposal would require re-opening Faithful Infoset. > > The current specification is correct to operate on an XPath node tree. > XSLT, which is our assumed default transformation environment, employs > a node tree. In all of our discussions of the logical consequences of > our decisions, > we have assumed an XPath node tree which implies XML Normalization, > including > whitespace handling, internal entity resolution, namespace-qualification, > character encoding, and so on. David's suggested changes would entail > changing a large > number of variables which have not been discussed or accounted for. I do not believe David's change requires getting rid of XML Normalization or forcing GRDDL to operate on something besides an XPath node tree. It states that the GRDDL transformation can transforming the representation into a XPath node tree rather than only having the conversion of source document to the node-tree happen always outside the control of the transformation language. However, we need David's complete list of proposed changes to the spec before we see the full ramifications of the changes, and if he is unable to provide them it will make gaining any degree of confidence in his changes difficult at best. I am willing to consider David's change insofar as although it is clearly related to #faithful-infoset and #which-langs, as long as it does not contradict the current test-cases and the paragraph you wrote to resolve #faithful-infoset. However, I am not willing to re-open #faithful-infoset unless we have strong WG consensus on the matter, since it was WG decision. > Regards, > > Murray > > -- -harry Harry Halpin, University of Edinburgh http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin 6B522426
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 19:13:43 UTC