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

Re: URIs as inputs and outputs

From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 17:41:50 -0700
Message-ID: <4828ceec0604121741w495ec08egd3a43b6c5f3e6785@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

On 4/5/06, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote:
> The crux is that instead of passing *documents* between steps, we pass
> *URIs*. [...]

Jeni,

I look positively at ideas that try to unify concepts, but in this
case I have a hard time understanding how we can unify the concept of
document available at a certain URI and a named sequence of document
produced by a processor. Considering your example:

>    <p:step use="xslt2.0">
>      <p:input name="source" href="a.xml" />
>      <p:input name="stylesheet" href="b.xsl" />
>      <p:output name="result" href="c.xml" />
>    </p:step>

Just looking at this portion, is the input href="a.xml" a reference to
a file in the same directory of our pipeline, or is it a reference to
a <p:output name="..." href="a.xml" /> previously defined in the
pipeline? How do we make the difference?

I have to say that I feel more comfortable if we make the distinction
between a reference to a label defined previously in the pipeline and
a URI:

<p:input name="source" href="a.xml" />
<p:input name="source" label="a" />

Alex
--
Blog (XML, Web apps, Open Source):
http://www.orbeon.com/blog/
Received on Thursday, 13 April 2006 00:41:55 GMT

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