- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 00:36:40 +0100
- To: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- Cc: GK@NineByNine.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
[...] > I had the idea also, that it would be good if we were able to provide an > 'executable specification' of the translation from the RDF XML syntax > into triples and I suspect this will be easier and clearer if this > translation is to a very simple syntax. I've done an informal > experiment using an attribute grammar with an XSLT implementation and > that seemed to work ok. Sounds good, certainly the idea of 'executable specification'. It reminds me about ISO Standard Prolog (see e.g. the INRIA ISO Prolog web at http://pauillac.inria.fr/~hodgson/prolog/ ) where the executable specification (the ftp package is at ftp://ftp-lifo.univ-orleans.fr/pub/Users/eddbali/SdProlog/ ) is a specific implementation of Standard Prolog. So, all concepts which are implementation defined, implementation dependent or undefined have received some interpretation. It's mainly that last point that I wanted to stress, although it must be possible to write such an executable specification in N3. Brian, is that informal experiment using an attribute grammar with an XSLT implementation the one at http://www.bmcb.btinternet.co.uk/2001/rdf/exec-grammar/spec.xsl ? -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 13 April 2001 18:38:37 UTC