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

Re: declare-step - atomic steps vs. empty pipelines

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 12:17:45 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2d4s05q2u.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Vasil Rangelov <boen.robot@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| I thought that steps and pipelines were unified thanks to this syntax.
|
| You should be able to have
| <p:declare-step type="test:my-atomic-step">
| That will only be evaluated if the pipeline processor doesn't have internal
| support for test:my-atomic-step already.

No, that would be a new feature (not in V1 :-)

| In this essence, an empty pipeline, and an empty step declaration are the
| same thing.

Empty pipelines are not allowed (per err:XS0027, for example).

| You don't need to declare or import extension steps for which the pipeline
| processor has internal support.

That's not true either. You must provide syntactic declarations for
all steps, even steps known to the processor.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | A hen is only an egg's way of making
http://nwalsh.com/            | another egg.--Samuel Butler (II)

Received on Thursday, 17 January 2008 17:17:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 17 January 2008 17:17:56 GMT