Re: More defaulting

/ Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
| I don't view this as defaulting:

Fair enough. I should have said syntactic sugar, I guess.

[...]
| So what I'd propose is:
|
| (1) Options are set by attributes on steps, which may contain {}s to
| indicate evaluated content
|
| (2) We provide a <p:variable> element to create lexically-scoped
| variables that can be declared and used anywhere within the pipeline
|
| (3) <p:option> is only used to declare options, at the start of
| <p:pipeline> (it has the same relationship to <p:variable> as
| <xsl:param> has to <xsl:variable>)
|
| The example above could then be written:
|
|   <p:variable name="root1" select="name(/*)">
|     <p:pipe step="step1" source="result" />
|   </p:variable>
|   <p:variable name="root2" select="name(/*)">
|     <p:pipe step="step2" source="result" />
|   </p:variable>
|   <my:example root1="{$root1}" root2="{$root2}" />
|
| Compound steps (<p:for-each>, <p:viewport>, <p:group> etc.) could no
| longer contain <p:option>.

That's a much larger and more significant change than I had in mind. I
was just suggesting a little syntactic sugar. Adding attribute value
templates and p:variable into the mix (along with p:option and
p:parameter) and removing options from compound steps all sounds like
far to high a cost (to me) to justify a little less typing.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Why in our youth does the life we still
http://nwalsh.com/            | have before us look so immeasurably
                              | long? Because we have to find room for
                              | the boundless hopes with which we cram
                              | it.-- Schopenhauer