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

Re: Syntax noodling

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 14:46:31 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <878xp88kmw.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk> was heard to say:
|> Maybe another way to look at it is that components can have 0 to n
|> *named* inputs, 0 to n *named* outputs, an optional *anonymous* input,
|> and an optional *anonymous* output.
|
| Alternatively the component definition could declare one of the
| named inputs to be the "default" input, and similarly for output.

Yes, if we have defaults at all, I think I like that better. It
amounts to the same thing for the user, but it feels more uniform to
me. Every input then has a name.

If an output has more than one input, do we still allow one of them
to be defaulted?

  <p:step name="p:xslt">
    <p:input ref="document"/>
    <p:input name="stylesheet" ref="style"/>
    <p:output label="styleout"/>
  </p:step>

vs.

  <p:step name="p:xslt">
    <p:input name="document" ref="document"/>
    <p:input name="stylesheet" ref="style"/>
    <p:output label="styleout"/>
  </p:step>

I think I'd prefer to make the name optional only in the case where
there is a single input or output. (As I've done for the output in
both cases above.)

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 11 May 2006 18:46:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:47 GMT