- From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 08:28:11 -0400
- To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
I think the biggest problem with this proposal is: "1. If an unknown step in the XProc namespace is encountered, it is assumed to be correct." What does "correct" mean in this case? Because the step is unknown, the processor has no idea about how its signature (input ports, output ports, options, ...) looks like. Knowing the input and output ports (and which ones are primary, if any) is essential to determine the correct evaluation order of steps in the pipeline. I don't think we can solve this by, for instance, saying that for unknown steps, a single primary input port and a single primary output port is always assumed. This kind of add-hoc rules would always lead to potential problems with different evaluation orders in V1 and V2 processors (and because of that, V1 processors may statically reject the V2 pipeline, or the pipeline may produce different results)... Regards, Vojtech
Received on Thursday, 8 October 2009 12:28:55 UTC