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

RE: Comments on Editor's Draft 9 January 2008

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:11:56 -0500
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC78709BD48AE@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

> | What does "atomic step is directly evaluated by the processor" 
> | actually mean in this context? I am still a bit confused how to 
> | understand the two sentences. Can you give me an example?
> Sure. Imagine that you have a command line processor that use 
> "-i port=doc" to identify inputs, "-o port=doc" to identify 
> outputs, "-ns prefix=uri" to identify command-line namespace 
> bindings, and "-pipeline qname" to identify the pipeline to run.
> Then I expect the following to run the atomic step "p:xslt" directly:
>   xproc -i stylesheet=x.xsl -i source=x.xml -o result=o.xml \
>         -ns p=http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc -pipeline p:xslt
> If the declaration for the "p:xslt" atomic step had 
> serialization or log declarations, I would expect them to be 
> used in this case. If the p:xslt appeared in a pipeline, they 
> would not.
> (I'm afraid we still don't have a clear description of how 
> p:pipeline, p:declare-step, and atomic steps really interact 
> since we made our syntax changes :-( )

After reading your e-mail, I noticed a couple of mentions of "direct
invocation" in the specification. I just haven't seen it before. I think
it's a really nice feature, so perhaps it deserves more emphasis in the


Vojtech Toman
Principal Software Engineer
EMC Corporation

Aert van Nesstraat 45
3012 CA Rotterdam
The Netherlands

Received on Monday, 11 February 2008 16:09:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:25 UTC