- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 18:49:33 +0100
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- CC: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, public-grddl-comments@w3.org, public-grddl-wg@w3.org, alanruttenberg@gmail.com
Harry Halpin wrote: > I think the central question is whether or not at this point the GRDDL > WG recommends that at least one GRDDL transform point to either: > > 1) A non-executable list of implementations > 2) An executable transform, likely an XSLT one. > > One could of course have *two* GRDDL transforms, one that points to 1) > and one that points to 2), but we are not sure how 1) would behave with > current GRDDL transforms. > > I think almost everyone except Bijan and possibly Jeremy agreed that at > the current moment, 2) would be more useful than 1). I agree with this 2) better than 1). But I liked 2) & 1) more than just 2) But unless any other wg member agrees with me, I think I've recorded my view here, and I'll concur with the group to keep consensus Jeremy
Received on Friday, 16 May 2008 17:50:40 UTC