Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Andreas Sewe (sewe@r...) 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" > /> > > I can see that Typekit wants to convey the additional information that the > transform's result is meant for display, but - as Typekit currently seems to > handle transforms - one loses the ability to indicate the result's namespace - > that is, in case it's XML. > > This is especially relevant if the result of such a transform does not have > it's own media type - as XHTML in the above example does - but has to use the > generic media type of "application/xml" instead. Good point. This makes it possible to use the description for machine-capable translations from one data type to another. > 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. Though the way typekit achieves this really is crap and should be rewritten. > Jonathan Borden wrote: > > If you read through the xml-dev archives, we had very early on > > considered including a mime-type property -- actually this was my > > initial suggestion, but then we decided this was redundant -- the > > nature can serve as a URI encoding of a mime-type as is described in > > the RDDL document. > > So, taking the above example into account I very much prefer RDDL's URI > encoding of a media type instead of introducing a seperate element, which > isn't even able to convey the result's namespace in the pretty common case of > XML output. +1 on using the URI. Eric
|
