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

Re: Concrete syntax for simple two-step example

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 10:39:13 -0700
Message-ID: <44AE9C41.9050701@milowski.org>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Alex Milowski writes:
> 
>> Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>>> (Note this is essentially use-case 1 [1])
>>> <components xmlns="[tbd]">
>>>  <component name="xsdValidate">
>>>   <input name="primary"/>
>>>   <input name="schemaDocs" arity="sequence"/>
>>>   <output name="primary"/>
>>>  </component>
>>>  <component name="xslt1.0">
>>>   <input name="primary"/>
>>>   <input name="stylesheet"/>
>>>   <output name="primary"/>
>>>  </component>
>>> <components>
>> Is the idea here that if the names match, then
>> they don't need to be declared?
> 
> Those are just the background declarations, the pipe itself is lower
> down.
> 
> Assuming you knew that, the defaults are not (entirely) name based, but
> sequence-based:
> 
>  1) If the first <step> in a <pipeline> has no <input
>     name="primary"...>, it's as if it had 
> 
>     <input name="primary" source="$.primary"/>
> 
>  2) If any other <step> in a <pipeline> has no <input
>     name="primary"...>, it's as if it had
> 
>     <input name="primary" source="[preceding step name].primary"/>
> 
>  3) If there is no <sink name="primary". . . /> in a <pipeline>, it's
>     as if it had
> 
>     <sink name="primary" source="[last step name].primary"/>
> 
>> In that case you need some kind of sibling relationship
>> that you don't have.
> 
> I think I do have that sibling relationship.

That's where we differ.  I saying that if you want to imply
order, we need some kind of "sequence" wrapper that declares
that siblings means a chain of steps.

Otherwise, I'm going to assume that siblings doesn't mean that
and you should connect up inputs to output to get the graph.

Please note that this is very different from smallx where
the sibling relationship *always* means ordered in document
order.

--Alex Milowski
Received on Friday, 7 July 2006 17:39:36 GMT

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