- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 23:50:48 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Seems even less strange because I proposed something like http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007May/0307.html (replace optional by required) but what bother's me is > yes no One or more documents that is a sequence by default (because 'no' is the default for @optional) is 1 or more I don't think it should be the default For me the default should be if nothing precised (1 and only 1) if sequence precised (0 or more) if sequence no (1 and only 1) Mohamed On 6/1/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > There was a thread recently about cardinality of inputs. The thrust > being that it was odd to have to say that a step accepted a sequence > in order for it to accept zero or one documents. > > I don't recall anyone objecting to the idea in principle, but I didn't > really like the syntax options very much. > > Here's another option that I think I like better: > > <p:input ... sequence="yes|no" optional="yes|no" ... /> > > > This breaks out as follows: > > Sequence Optional Input accepts > -------- -------- ------------- > no no Exactly one document > yes no One or more documents > no yes Zero or one documents > yes yes Zero or more documents > > I think the default, in both cases, should be "no". > > Comments? > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | One's never alone with a rubber duck. > http://nwalsh.com/ | > > -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 8 72 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Friday, 1 June 2007 21:50:51 UTC