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

Re: Possibly OT component request.

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:42:18 +0100
Message-ID: <711a73df0704261542o311f946flf8dba57adf2a2f49@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Vasil Rangelov" <boen.robot@gmail.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org

On 26/04/07, Vasil Rangelov <boen.robot@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've read the discussion about the optional archiving step component, and I
> have one suggestion for it. Instead of:
>   <p:unzip>
>     <p:option name="zip" value="/path/to/file.zip"/>
>     <p:option name="name" value="/internal/name/with/paths"/>
>   </p:unzip>
> Where the name of the parameter seems to show the type of the file, I
> suggest moving the type of the archive into a new parameter and call the
> current parameter something more generic... like "archive". The value of the
> type parameter should be (I believe) a MIME type, as that's the idea behind
> MIME types, right?

Which sounds like a lot of overloading?
If the pipe deals in XML files, who about keeping it simple,
if the application that is taking the file can't deal with it, it's a
user error?

That reduces implementation complexity and parameter complexity?


regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 22:42:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:42 GMT