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

RE: Implicit parameter input on p:pipeline

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:23:38 -0500
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC787097FA4D7@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>

It also seems to me that the text in section 2.5 does not handle the
case when a pipeline declares an explicit *output* port named
"parameters". I think this should be allowed (the specification does not
seem to forbid it), but then the text:

"If the pipeline declares an ordinary input named 'parameters', the
implicit primary parameter input port will be named 'parameters1'. If
that's not available, then 'parameters2', etc. until an available name
is found."

Should be changed to:

"If the pipeline declares an ordinary input OR OUTPUT named
'parameters', the implicit primary parameter input port will be named
'parameters1'. If that's not available, then 'parameters2', etc. until
an available name is found."

Regards,
Vojtech

--
Vojtech Toman
Principal Software Engineer
EMC Corporation

Aert van Nesstraat 45
3012 CA Rotterdam
The Netherlands

Toman_Vojtech@emc.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-processing-model-comments-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-xml-processing-model-comments-request@w3.org] 
> On Behalf Of Toman_Vojtech@emc.com
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:42 PM
> To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
> Subject: Implicit parameter input on p:pipeline
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Since the p:pipeline now always contains an implict "source" 
> input port and an implicit "result" output port, I wonder if 
> the same cannot be done with the parameter inputs.
> 
> Section 2.5 says:
> 
> "Additionally, if a p:pipeline does not declare any parameter 
> input ports, but contains a step which has a primary 
> parameter input port, then an implicit primary parameter 
> input port (named 'parameters') will be added to the 
> pipeline. (If the pipeline declares an ordinary input named 
> 'parameters', the implicit primary parameter input port will 
> be named 'parameters1'. If that's not available, then 
> 'parameters2', etc.
> until an available name is found.)"
> 
> Cannot this be changed to something like:
> 
> "All p:pipeline pipelines have an implicit primary parameter 
> input port named 'parameters'. Any parameter input ports that 
> the p:pipeline declares explicitly are in addition to this 
> port and may not be declared primary."
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Vojtech
> 
> 
> --
> Vojtech Toman
> Principal Software Engineer
> EMC Corporation
> 
> Aert van Nesstraat 45
> 3012 CA Rotterdam
> The Netherlands
> 
> Toman_Vojtech@emc.com
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 12:20:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 January 2008 12:20:39 GMT