- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:34:30 +0200
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Hi, there is one part of the current GRDDL editor's draft that I believe is problematic: """ While javascript, C, or any other programming language technically expresses the relevant information, XSLT is specifically designed to express XML to XML transformations and has some good safety characteristics. """ --http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec#txforms I understand the wish to use XSLT most of the time, and were I to deploy GRDDL XSLT would likely be my choice. However at WWW2005 I had an interesting conversation with the microformats people, and how their efforts could be made to also fit into the SemWeb if they used GRDDL. I started explaining how it worked and the second I said "XSLT" someone shouted "Stop! You've already lost most of the people you're trying to cater to." And the fact of the matter is it's true. I therefore think it would be most useful in the interest of spreading GRDDL not only to XML geeks but to Web geeks in general. More obvious support for Javascript (including how exactly the script would go about getting the document it needs to process and how it would provide its output) would go a long way there. It would also have the major advantage that it could also apply to old school HTML (some XSLT processors can do that too, but it's not always an easy path to tread). Furthermore I am wondering if thought has been given to using GRDLL as a full fledge SemSheets language, with all the features found in style sheets today (multiple implementation languages based on the type attribute or pseudo-attribute, multiple semantic views of the same document, etc.) as well as to ways of having a remote service perform the translation (to get the translation of this document, POST it to foo and see what you get back). -- Robin Berjon Senior Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2005 01:21:04 UTC