Re: Informative Text re ambiguity

Since we are required [1] by W3C Process to submit a *single* vote, John
and I need to determine a CCF position on these suggestions.  This email
is an attempt to do that.

In a (straw poll) scenario where the only proposals put forth are those
below and they are mutually exclusive:

1c http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0331.html
2d http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0355.html
3c http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2007Jun/0333.html

The CCF vote is for 3c

If procedure allows for additional proposals, the CCF vote is
essentially for a hybrid of Harry's suggestion below along with 2d.

In particular, the proposal breaks up the GRDDL 'workflow' into 2
sections (for clarity): transformation application (where the identified
transformations are applied) and transformation discovery (where GRDDL
'snoops' to discover transformations to apply.  In both cases, the
procedure is conditional and depends on if the transform is 'simplistic'
and if an XML Processing Model (yet to be defined) is applied.

== Transformation Application ==

If the transformation is an STP (Simplistic Transformation Processor -
XSLT 1.0 essentially) then:

We use the Minimal XPath Model (MX) as input to the transformation
algorithm, where MX is formulated by the non-validating parsing
mechanisms outlined in proposal 2d.

Otherwise (if for example, the transformation is an XProc document), we
use the original XML document representation as input to the
transformation algorithm.

== Transformation Determination ==

If the GRDDL-aware agent is subject to an XML Processing Model (which
the XML Processing Model WG is chartered to produce) then MX is used to
determine transformations.

Otherwise, the original XML document representation is used to determine
transformations where the formulation of the XPath data model is subject
to the applied XML Processing Model.

The notion of an STP would follow from Harry's wording below:

> "In the case where a GRDDL transform specifies all expected
> pre-processing, then the GRDDL transformation language can/should be
> given as input the representation of the GRDDL source document, not
> the
> node-set derived by the GRDDL-aware agent."

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#Votes

> 
-- 
Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
ogbujic@ccf.org


===================================




Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top 3 hospitals in
America by U.S.News & World Report. Visit us online at
http://www.clevelandclinic.org for a complete listing of
our services, staff and locations.


Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
you have received this communication in error,  please
contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.

Received on Wednesday, 27 June 2007 15:04:47 UTC