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

Re: The defaulting story

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 13:28:48 +0000
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5b8xh1idin.fsf@erasmus.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Hash: SHA1

I am sort of OK with this as far as it goes, but had not thought that
we should depend on names so much.  That is, the rules I had in mind
were more along the lines of

  A step with only one unspecified input, preceded or within a
  step/container with only one port available for binding, defaults to
  that input being piped from that port

But that doesn't manage the defaulting of the pipeline to the first
step very well in many cases, including your example. . .

My earlier suggestions about this had depended on a notion of
'primary' inputs and outputs. . .  But no such notion is currently
defined.  I feel like it might be useful in other ways. . .

Hmm.  We do after all _control_ the names of all the built-in
components. . .

- -- 
 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]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

Received on Thursday, 21 December 2006 13:31:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:41 UTC