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


From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 00:30:20 -0800
Message-ID: <4828ceec0702080030p2b4dd0dehc7dfff714c72ad24@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

When a component has multiple outputs, if the pipeline author does not
specify any of the output to be the default (or doesn't specify the
outputs at all), can the component define which one is the outputs is
the default? According to what I see in the specification, the answer
to that question is "no". Is this intentional?

If the answer to that question is "yes" and we have a consensus on
this, I think that this next point becomes irrelevant.


In section 4.2.3, I read:

"It is a static error to identify two different ports as the default.
It is also a static error if the component on which this declaration
appears has exactly one output and that output is marked as not being
the default."

Should it also be a static error if the component on which this
declaration appears has more than one output and none of the outputs
is marked as being the default? If we answer yes to this question,
those 3 rules could be summarized as:

For components that have one or more outputs, it is a static error if
no output or more than one outputs are marked as default.


Still in 4.2.3 the <p:output> used in a construct doesn't specify the
"default" attribute. Is this intentional? If we allow the "default"
attribute there as well, when <p:output> is used in
<p:when>/<p:otherwise>, should we enforce the same port name to be
marked as the default across branches?


Finally, I think that defining "default input" in the glossary would help.

Orbeon Forms - Web Forms for the Enterprise, Done the Right Way
Received on Thursday, 8 February 2007 08:30:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:41 UTC