[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Eric Hanson wrote:
> Andreas Sewe (sewe@rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de) wrote:
>>> Eric Hanson wrote:
>>>> The data in the two formats is pretty similar. Typekit uses
>>>> nature and purpose as well. It adds one more property,
>>>> mime-type, which indicates in the case of a transformation, what
>>>> the target mime-type of that transformation is. This property
>>>> is optional however.
>>
>> So, concerning media types, purposes and natures, can anybody explain
>> to me
>> why Typekit, while using RDDL's notions of both nature and purpose to
>> good
>> effect, differs in the way it describes a XSL transform? Compare the
>> following
>> example from the Typekit Spec:
>>
>> <tk:resource element="birdcall" src="display-birdcall.xsl">
>> <tk:nature>http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform</tk:nature>
>>
>> <tk:purpose>http://typekit.org/ns/typekit/0.2/purposes#display</tk:
>> purpose>
>> <tk:mimetype>application/xhtml+xml</tk:mimetype>
>> </tk:resource>
>>
>> to
>>
>> <rddl:resource
>> xlink:href="display-birdcall.xsl"
>> xlink:role="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
>> xlink:arcrole="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";
>> />
Also see RDDL2 (Tim Bray's vocabulary): http://www.rddl.org/rddl2
>
>
>> Furthermore the semantics of RDDL's purpose differ from Typekit's
>> purpose in
>> case of a transform. RDDL uses the purpose to indicate the result's
>> type,
>> while Typekit indicates the result's purpose. IMHO such subtle
>> semantic
>> differences should be avoided in case of two similar specs -
>> especially since
>> they complement each other quite nicely.
>
> +1 for getting them the same.
>
> I'm not a big fan of how RDDL overloads nature/purpose to
> include info like this. IMHO, nature should indicate what a
> resource *is*, purpose what it *does*, in general terms, without
> indicating any specifics. Everything else should be external.
Fair enough. I was making the assumption that one can *infer* that
something that *is* an XSLT *does* a transform but indeed it is
overloading what would otherwise be a rddl:nature (of the result) with
a rddl:purpose (i.e. that the purpose of a transform is to produce
something with the nature of the result) If that makes any sense ...
perhaps not.
I should point out that the way this is described in the RDDL spec is
*explicitly* being used as an *example*.
RDDL 7.14: "
XSLT Stylesheet
An example of an XSLT stylesheet for RDDL, which accepts the params
role and arcrole. The transform inserts the document referenced by
xlink:href in the output. This code is shown as an example and is not
normative.
"
I.e. the RDDL spec does not mandate that nature and purpose be used
this way with XSLT, rather offers an example of how nature and purpose
*might* be used with XSLT.
Jonathan
|
