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: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:22:43 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <87zmitme0s.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt> was heard to say:
| I was talking about testing over pipeline parameters without having to test
| xpaths against documents. Example:
|
| <p:pipeline>
|   <p:param name="debug" value="false" />
|
|   <p:step name="xslt">
|     ...
|   </p:step>
|   <p:if test="true($debug)">
|     <!-- perform some debugging tasks -->
|   </p:if>
|   ...
| </p:pipeline>
|
| If this type of features isn't allowed in the pipeline language, we would have
| to define the debug flag in a dummy document and afterwards test that document
| with a xpath expression.

Right. That's what we decided last week. You'd have to say:

<p:pipeline>
  <p:param name="debug">
   <true/>
  </p:param>

  <p:step name="xslt">
    ...
  </p:step>

  <p:if input="$debug" test="/true">
    <!-- perform some debugging tasks -->
  </p:if>
  ...
</p:pipeline>

We might decide that we need something simpler for this case.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

Received on Monday, 10 April 2006 19:23:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:47 GMT