- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:32:55 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2lk8fluyg.fsf@nwalsh.com>
In private email, I was asked:
| 4.1 In some cases, compound steps can contain implicit primary output
| ("result") that is created when the compound has no declared output step
| and the last step of the subpipeline has an unbound primary output (spec
| section 2.3). How does a declaration of this primary output look like?
| In our implementation, the implicit primary output always accept
| sequences of documents (sequence="true")
I replied:
I think that needs to be made more clear. I think it should inherit
the properties of the output declaration on the last step. So if the
last step produces a sequence, then so does it, but not otherwise.
Anyone disagree?
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | A life, admirable at first sight, may
http://nwalsh.com/ | have cost so much in imposed
| liabilities, chores and self-abasement,
| that, brilliant though it appears, it
| cannot be considered other than a
| failure. Another, which seems to have
| misfired, is in reality a triumphant
| success, because it has cost so
| little.--Henry De Montherlant
Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 13:33:07 UTC