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

Re: Synchronisation

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 09:42:05 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <87bqi3os42.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh writes:
|> Well, when I suggested it, I had in mind only that it would have the
|> same effect as wiring up a dummy output to an input that is never
|> read.
| That's not good enough, I don't think -- in order to achieve
| synchronisation, the input would _have_ to be read, and read _before_
| the step did anything else!

Yes, but to the extent that we have any synchronization at all, all we
have is the wiring. There's nothing that says a step actually has to
consume its inputs.

For V1, I'm content that we will not offer any synchronization
mechanisms. If you have data you care about, you best make sure it
flows through a pipe so that you can consume it that way instead of
trying to arrange to access it through some side-effect.

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 5 April 2007 13:42:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:42 UTC