please check editorial fix re #issue-output-formats

In discussion with David Booth in public-grddl-comments,
I discovered a bug and fixed it:

 <p>As noted above, each GRDDL transformation specifies a
 <b>transformation property</b>, a function from XPath document nodes
-to RDF/XML documents, and hence to RDF graphs.  This function need not
+to RDF graphs.  This function need not

i.e. the range of a GRDDL transformation property is an RDF Graph,
not an RDF/XML document. The rules already said this; that explanatory
text was a bit behind.

I also updated the namespace document (and vocabulary section)
to formalize the fact that transformations are owl:FunctionalProperty-s.

I should get Jeremy to confirm that these changes are editorial,
i.e. consistent with WG decisions to date. But I think he's
on holiday. So perhaps someone else's confirmation will suffice?
Harry?

[[
Revision 1.259  2007/05/02 13:44:48  connolly
- Fixed some text in the Transformations section to match the rules:
  the output of a GRDDL transformation is an RDF graph, not an RDF/XML
  document.

-- edited #txforms section labels for consistency

- updated the GRDDL namespace document excerpt to formalize the fact
  that GRDDL Transformations are FunctionalProperties

-- moved the parts that weren't a quote outside the quote

Revision 1.258  2007/04/30 15:19:30  connolly
update usecases cite
]]
 -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#changes


Booth points out that we don't use rfc2119:should when we say:

[[
The rule above covers the case of a <em>transformation
property</em> that relates an XPath document node to an RDF graph via
an RDF/XML document.  Transformations may use other, unspecified,
mechanisms.
]]

I tried to wordsmith it and didn't come up with anything
straightforward. I'm also a bit leery about adding
normative assertions at this point in the process.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Wednesday, 2 May 2007 14:03:48 UTC