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

Re: Implicit parameter input on p:pipeline

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:54:19 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2wspxdc50.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Toman_Vojtech@emc.com was heard to say:
| 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

Hmm, that should probably read "p:pipeline or p:declare-step" now.

| 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."

It could, but I don't think it would be less confusing. I don't expect
explicit parameter ports to be needed very often and probably almost
never on a p:pipeline.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything is temporary.
http://nwalsh.com/            | 

Received on Friday, 25 January 2008 17:54:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 January 2008 17:54:35 GMT