- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 18:17:06 +0000
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Further to the whole question of versioning. . .
3.8 [1] appears to me to contradict itself:
"An element is only an extension element if it is an ignorable
element that occurs as a direct child of a p:pipeline or
p:pipeline-library."
"[E]lements in a subpipeline are interpreted as follows. . .
2. Is in ignorable namespace?
a. Is a known extension? Process as appropriate."
How can an element in a sub-pipeline be a direct child of p:pipeline?
I know I originally proposed the interpretation bullets, but I'm still
confused. . .
Looking at the RNG schema, and other parts of the spec., I _think_ the
editor's intent was to allow extensions only in subpipelines, as a way
of allowing for . . . extensions. But that is completely at odds with
the following from the beginning of 3.8:
"The presence of an extension element must not cause the connections
between steps to differ from the connections that any other
conformant XProc processor would produce."
Such a constraint would render any extension useless, as far as I can
tell.
Maybe this all is moot, as this aspect of the spec. has to be
revisited in light of our proposal wrt language evolution at the
f2f [2], discussion wrt Comment 15. [Actually, I've excerpted
that discussion and replied to the Comment 15 thread with it,
and then sent _this_ message in the resulting thread . . .]
ht
[1] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#extension-elements
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Nov/0031.html
- --
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHRcejkjnJixAXWBoRAvFyAJ9QvsWB+iANBXbaaeHwTSnPgkGjZgCfSG7K
8+3uWDPKUSnfwvvVOYAC68Y=
=BCkr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2007 18:17:25 UTC