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

Re: What is passed between processes?

From: Erik Bruchez <ebruchez@orbeon.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:39:16 +0100
Message-ID: <43C526A4.2030700@orbeon.com>
CC: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

Fang, Andrew wrote:

> I was actually thinking about a fall back mechanism here. Custom
> component should specify a fallback that must be implemented by all
> pipeline implementations. It could be as simple as passing the
> information along without any processing.

I wonder how many use cases would actually benefit from this. I would 
think that in most situations you would simply be in a "fatal error" 
type of scenario. Consider simply an XSLT transformation you want to 
perform: if you don't have an XSLT transformation component available, 
your task simply cannot be executed. What sense does it make to pass the 
information unmodified?

Maybe the right way of looking at this suggestion is for its proponents 
to provide concrete use cases that would benefit from a fallback mechanism.

Alternatively, a generic error (exception) handling mechanism could take 
care of the issue, assuming the absence of a component is handled as a 
runtime error.

Received on Wednesday, 11 January 2006 15:39:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:38 UTC