W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > August 2008

Re: what about option values on directly invoked p:declare-step

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 06:37:45 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m27iaa3b7q.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| in the May 1st spec, it currently states in section 5.8 p:declare-step
|
| 'When a declared step is evaluated directly by the XProc processor (as
| opposed to occurring as an atomic step in some container), how the
| input and output ports are bound to documents is
| implementation-defined.'
|
| I imagine this allows direct invocation of a p:declare-step, which
| might look something like the following from the commandline;
|
|> xproc -f somexprocfile.xpl somexprocstep
|
| is it an oversight that there is nothing in this section about the
| values/handling of other bits like  parameters, options, etc ?

Yes, I think so.

| also, I know that we are not specifying the signature of the
| commandline, but perhaps we could use the following as an example of
| how option/value pairs are 'injected' into the xproc ....
|
|> xproc -f somexprocfile.xpl somexprocstep someoption=someoptionvalue someotheroption=someothervalue

I'm a little reluctant to add specific examples of possible command
line syntaxes because there are so many possibilities.

| it occurs to me that we might want to consider it an error if an
| option is not defined as well.

That'd be err:XS0031 I think.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Wink at small faults; for thou has
http://nwalsh.com/            | great ones.--Thomas Fuller (II)

Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 10:38:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 21 August 2008 10:38:31 GMT