Re: Not GRDDL, but GRDDL-like (was Re: GRDDL and OWL/XML)

>
>Ok. How would the OWL WG encourage GRDDL agent authors to include the
>transform *without* providing an executable? Is there any sense to
>this at all?

Yes and no.

I have had trouble understanding your notion of a GRDDL Transformation
that is not executable. By way of background, please consider the following
fundamental statement from the introduction to GRDDL:

=============================================
Faithful Renditions

By specifying a GRDDL transformation, the author of a document states that 
the transformation will provide a faithful rendition in RDF of information 
(or some portion of the information) expressed through the XML dialect used 
in the source document.

Likewise, by specifying a GRDDL namespace transformation or profile 
transformation, the creator of that namespace or profile states that the 
transformation will provide a faithful RDF rendition of a class of source 
documents which relate to that namespace or profile. A namespace document 
or a profile document also provide a means for their authors to explain in 
prose the purpose of the transformation or any policy statements.
=============================================

I can imagine a scenario in which the GRDDL Transformation is a text document
which describes in excruciating detail how a human being or software could 
parse
the contents of the XML document and produce an RDF document that satisfies
the faithful rendition promise. So, yes, you could use a non-executable to 
yield
an RDF rendition. But it doesn't seem very satisfying. Obviously I am missing
something important.

To what do you imagine linking, if not an executable transformation?

Could you please provide an example of a document or document class
to which you would wish to apply a GRDDL transform without pointing to
an executable, an example of what you would point to, and an example result
that you would expect in consequence?

I'd like to understand what you are asking, but the conversation has been 
at the
wrong altitude for me.

Murray

Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2008 21:20:52 UTC