Re: Please drop my action to respond to issue-dbooth9a

Booth, David (HP Software - Boston) wrote:
>> From: Chimezie Ogbuji [mailto:ogbujic@ccf.org] 
>> . . .
>> I noticed there is a simultaneous TAG thread [1] on this very topic.
>>
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2007May/0063.html
> 
> Yes, that message from John Cowen is an excellent illustration of the
> fact that it only reliably makes sense to talk about the semantics
> (read: "GRDDL results") of a *representation* -- not an information
> resource.


I made a relevant change the GRDDL spec some months ago...

---
revision 1.188
date: 2007/01/24 15:25:46;  author: connolly;  state: Exp;  lines: +115 -81
* domain of grddl:transformation is now an XPath root node, rather
   than an information resource, to fix the bug with multiple
   representations that BrianM reported 2006-11-15.  grddl:txlink goes
   away as a result.
---

But for grdd:result itself, the rule concludes things about
the resource based on its representation...

[[
If an information resource([WEBARCH], section 2.2) IR is represented by 
an XML document with an XPath root node R, and R has a GRDDL 
transformation with a transformation property TP, and TP applied to R 
gives an RDF Graph[RDFC04] G, then G is a GRDDL result of IR.
]]
  -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#rule_result

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/

Received on Thursday, 31 May 2007 18:06:29 UTC