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

Addressing the multiple uses of "context"

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:33:25 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <87odolcw2i.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Michael observed that we have defined a "context" but we also make
reference to the "XPath context" so there is at least the potential
for confusion.

We also have the outstanding problem that for-each and viewport use an
input named "source" for their input even though that "source" *isn't*
the primary input to the components that are contained inside them.

It was clear that on the call some people felt that the input sources
for for-each and viewport were similar to the input source for the
tests on choose/when and some people felt that they weren't similar at
all.

I can live with the current situation, but I am concerned that having
both the name for the port that becomes "current" inside the component
and the name "source" for the whole thing may be confusing.

We could address this problem in the following way:

1. Change our terminology so that what we currently call the "context"
is called the "environment". (Maybe we should do this even if we don't
do part 2.)

2. Change the element named "xpath-context" in choose/when to simply
"context".

3. Use "context" in for-each and viewport instead of p:input name="source".

Context isn't ideal, but ... I don't have a better name.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 21:33:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:49 GMT