Re: ease of use proposal - adding 'from' attribute to step to define connection

thx Gerrit,

defining multiples in the 'from' attribute to represent multiple p:pipe
seems like a win as well.

keep the thoughtful comments coming ... I do appreciate both yours and
Florent eye for scope, your suggestions are also perfect in that respect
(eg. the reality of how much change we can propose at this stage).

next step is a more formal description to WG and see if we can't get this
drafted into spec language.

J


On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex <
gerrit.imsieke@le-tex.de> wrote:

>
> On 26.11.2014 20:13, James Fuller wrote:
>
>> Its an interesting thought  (FWIW- originally I also was toying with
>> things like mystep#result so its nice to here confirmation from a 2nd
>> pair of eyes).
>>
>> I also like result@mystep ... and from my pov still fits in with the
>> scope of change being discussed.
>>
>
> I like result@mystep, too, and I think we can shortcut even further. We
> have a significant number of steps where an input port connects to multiple
> output ports.
>
> In a typical project, I found 35 out of 443 input connections and 2 out of
> 171 output declarations that had multiple p:pipe children.
>
> I don’t see what keeps us from turning the multiple pipes into
> space-separated port@step tokens within a @from attribute:
>
> <p:input port="meta">
>   <p:pipe port="result" step="select-edition-meta"/>
>   <p:pipe port="result" step="meta"/>
> </p:input>
> →
> <p:input port="meta" from="result@select-edition-meta result@meta"/>
>
> <p:output port="report" sequence="true">
>   <p:pipe port="report" step="test-suite"/>
>   <p:pipe port="report" step="regular-ebooks-iteration"/>
> </p:output>
> →
> <p:output port="report" from="report@test-suite report@regular-ebooks-
> iteration"/>
>
> with a tacit sequence="true" if there are multiple tokens in @from or if
> there are multiple p:pipe children. (?)
>
> Gerrit
>
>