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

Re: Alternative to x!y

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:25:53 +0100
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bk64zwk1q.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I _really_ don't want to use ->, it's just semantically wrong (the
step doesn't _produce_ or _yield_ the port, the step scopes the port),
as well as somehow crossing some microparsing boundary I don't want to
cross.

I'm not unhappy with !, but if people aren't, what about using . and
requiring no . in step or port names?

Or, if I can suppress my microparsing concerns, what about x[y] ?

But, the longer this goes on, the harder I find it to repress my
"Having trouble designing a micro-syntax?  XML has the answer, it's
called _markup_!" reflex response in this sort of situation.   So why
not
 <p:input port="document">
  <pipe step="x" port="y"/>
 </p:input>

possibly shortened to
 <p:input port="document" source="x" sourcePort="y"/>

ht
- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFE7HOBkjnJixAXWBoRAqFqAJ9Ei4WPwMsKHq9K2QrDC6O2xbds/QCfVMVe
bRka5WKEws/Ww9gP5cd8XzY=
=62op
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2006 15:26:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:48 GMT