[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [RDDL] Nature, Purpose (and XSLT)
- From: Leigh Dodds <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: Jonathan Borden <email@example.com>, xml-dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:28:05 +0000
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Borden [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: 13 February 2001 03:32
> To: Leigh Dodds; xml-dev
> Subject: RE: [RDDL] Nature, Purpose (and XSLT)
> > The beneficial side effect to this is that we can use RDDL as a means
> > to piece together transformation pipelines: presented with an XML
> > document, and the ideal output for a transformation we can inspect
> > its RDDL description and determine whether there is a direct transform
> > available. If not we can traverse additional RDDL documents until we
> > can piece together the appropriate pipeline.
> This seems like a really cool idea. Essentially the purpose is
> dependent on the nature of a resource, and when the resource is an XSLT,
> purpose can be the nature of what it is transformed into.
Yes, I think it falls out very naturally for XSLT. I still wonder whether
more specific natures might be attached to other implementations, i.e.
> This is where it really starts to get interesting. Possibly some sort of
> "agent" can piece together fragments of transforms and code it
> might find on the web.
Yep, XSLT I think gives a starting use case, but there's obviously a lot
can be done by 'mining' the information contained in multiple RDDL files.
I did wonder whether the output of this could be RDF statements, or maybe a
language' that defines translation pipelines (a la RickJs
It seems to me that this kind of facility will be increasingly useful for
applications; especially if one can obtain suitable
from traversing a graph of RDDL documents.