W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > April 2006

Re: Minutes for XProc WG telcon of 6 Apr 2006

From: Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 10:49:11 +0100
Message-ID: <443A2A17.6010004@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
>   Conditionals and sub-pipelines
>    Norm: Richard proposed a single standard conditional that takes a document
>    and an XPath, is that enough?
>    Norm wonders if the WG thinks that's all we need
>    Henry: If you need something really complicated, you can write an
>    arbitrarily complicated computation that produces a document.
>    ... And then switch on that conditional.
>    Proposal: The pipeline conditional component is XPath expression over
>    document. If you need more, build a document and use that?
>    Accepted.

I've been thinking a bit more about this issue. On the assumption that 
we allow specifying pipeline parameters (like step/component parameters 
- which I would like to have in the language), shouldn't we allow 
conditionals over these parameters? I wouldn't like to have to produce a 
document for activating a simple debug flag inside an XProc-based 
application, for instance.


Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 09:49:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:39 UTC