W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > April 2007

Parameter binding

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 15:48:12 +0100
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <f5b7iss19hv.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Is it obvious to everyone how this works?  Is it clear in the spec?
(You can guess from the fact that I bother to write this that the
answers for me are "no" and "not really").

Consider the following pipeline:

    <p:pipeline xmlns:my="http://www.example.com/mypipe">

     <p:input port="stdin"/>
     <p:parameter name="my:parm" value="true"/>
     <p:output port="stdout"/>

     <p:declare-step type="my:xmpl">
      <p:input port="in"/>
      <p:parameter name="my:parm" required="yes"/>
      <p:output port="out"/>
     </p:declare-step>

     <p:xinclude/>

     <my:xmpl/>

    </p:pipeline>

Is this a valid pipeline or not?  Where do you look in the spec. to
get the answer?

Would it make a difference if the two <p:parameter>s used name="parm",
i.e. no namespace?

ht
- -- 
 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]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGE7qskjnJixAXWBoRAqqHAJ9esH7mWhsBlHk0+/y5UUiUerPGyQCfRuCz
QL7EuUaVIxwDn04AlN9k02o=
=nbwW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2007 14:48:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:50 GMT