[closed] Re: p:pipe convention

"James Fuller" <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> writes:

> consider the following contrived example;
[...]
> could we not omit the step attribute on the p:pipe to default mean
> 'this' step e.g. the local step ?

The WG considered this kind of "shortcut" but concluded that defining
one kind of default for a missing p:input and another kind of default
for missing attributes on a p:pipe would just be too confusing.

The WG is not motivated to revisit this issue at this time, we are
satisfied by the status quo.

If you find this resolution unsatisfactory, please let us know.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | We do not know what thoughts stirred in
http://nwalsh.com/            | the mind of the last of the mastodons,
                              | but we can take it that they were
                              | nothing very remarkable. It is hardly
                              | likely that the last man will have the
                              | mind of a Goethe. He will die, and that
                              | will be the last stage of human
                              | progress.--Anatole France