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

Re: New draft: 10 Aug

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:20:33 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2fy2ba0su.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| On 8/21/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
|> Alex, please make sure you look for comments to you!
|>
|> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
|> | (Sorry Big mail)
|> |
|> | s/7.1.1 Add Attributes/7.1.1 Add Attribute/ (remove the extra s)
|> | s/Expries/Expires/
|> | s/availble/available/
|>
|> Fixed.
|
| s/Expries/Expires/
| This one is die hard...

DEAD! (I didn't realize that it was in an included file; oh, and Alex, I
moved those files to the examples directory.)

| A brand new one
| s/containd/contained/

Fixed.

|> | In application of this
|> |
|> | Example 10,
|> | p:parameters step,
|> | p:xslt step,
|> | p:xslt2 step,
|> | p:xsl-formatter step,
|> | and p:xquery step should add sequence="yes" to input port="parameters"
|>
|> Fixed, I think.
|
| Almost, but not for Example 10

And fixed in the examples now.

|> | --
|> | In the declaration of component, no distinction is made between XSLT
|> | pattern and XPath expression : please make the distinction
|> |
|> | <p:viewport
|> |   name? = NCName
|> |   match = XPath expression><!-- should be XSLT pattern instead -->
|> | </p:viewport>
|> |
|> | <p:when
|> |   name? = NCName
|> |   test = XPath expression><!-- is ok -->
|> | </p:when>
|>
|> Fixed.
|
| Great !
| Is it possible to make something equivalent for Standard step library ?

Where? We don't give the types in p:declare-step options, do we?

|> | Remove unneeded sequence="no" in p:add-attribute
|> |
|> | Please add sequence="yes" to output port=result in p:add-xml-base or
|> | remove it from input port="source"
|>
|> I think Alex fixed those.
|
| Great !
|
|> | It seems option=all need to have a default value to 'no', and
|> | option=relative also
|>
|> Ok.
|
| This raise the question of whether we could have boolean with *no*
| default value at all ?

I think Henry pushed back on that. If we think there should be a
default, we should express it using the default attribute. An
unspecified option is just that, unspecified.

| Some more adding following the new draft
|
| In 7.1.15 Namespace Rename
| elements-only and element-only (Choose one)

element*s* seemed like the right one.

| In 7.3 Serialization Options
| standalone is not really a boolean since it has 'omit' value
|
| Please update examples with the new boolean rules (true/false, instead
| of yes/no)

Done, I believe.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Knowledge, sense, honesty, learning,
http://nwalsh.com/            | good behavior are the chief things
                              | towards making a man's fortune, next to
                              | interest and opportunity.

Received on Wednesday, 22 August 2007 18:19:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT