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

Re: Naming steps or naming outputs

From: Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:08:49 +0100
Message-ID: <44A55AA1.3090400@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Alex Milowski wrote:
> I don't think changing <my:safeguard/> to <p:step type="my:safeguard"/>
> is going to keep your CPU from melting.  The pipeline processor has to
> know what my:safeguard means in either case.  As such, the burden is the
> same.

With a generic syntax every xproc implementation will be able to 
identify what a step is. If some non-core component is used (e.g. 
my:safeguard) and my implementation doesn't support it, it can stop the 
execution (or even not execute the pipeline at all). By having a direct 
syntax, a pipeline implementation may not be able to distinguish between 
a non-core component and, for instance, some annotations in rdf/dc.



Received on Friday, 30 June 2006 17:26:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:40 UTC