W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > April 2007

Comments on draft of 5 April 2007

From: Anthony B. Coates (Miley Watts) <abcoates@mileywatts.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 20:37:21 +0100
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.trazgjx1hhgqys@laptop01.mileywatts.com>

Here are some comments in no particular order.

1) In Example 1, "fig1" is referenced, but not defined.

2) I agree with earlier comments that the text snippet

==> "Every compound step contains zero or more steps. [Definition: The  
steps that occur directly inside a compound step are called contained  
steps.] [Definition: A compound step which immediately contains another  
step is called its container.]"

is in conflict with the text snippets

==> "[Definition: The steps (and the connections between them) within a  
compound step form a subpipeline.]"
==> "A compound step can contain one or more subpipelines and it  
determines how, and which, if any, of its subpipelines are evaluated."

There needs to be more clarity on whether the step or the subpipeline is  
the container (or both?), and how subpipelines are related to the compound  
steps in which they occur, and whether some compound steps contain  
implicit subpipelines while others contain explicit subpipelines.

3) Within a single step, each option must have a unique name, and each  
parameter must have a unique name.  However, can a single step have an  
option and a parameter with the same name?

4) I agree with earlier comments that, in the description of the standard  
library, there needs to be consistency in whether attributes like  
"required" are always shown, or only shown when they take a non-default  

Cheers, Tony.
Anthony B. Coates
Senior Partner
Miley Watts LLP
Experts In Data
+44 (79) 0543 9026
Data standards participant: genericode, ISO 20022 (ISO 15022 XML),  
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2007 12:52:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:24 UTC