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

Re: Composability

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:41:06 +0100
To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5blkew9k5p.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeni Tennison writes:

> [Namespaces]
> 
> The situation that will trip you up, I think, is where the option's
> value is set based on the value of some attribute or element in a
> separate XML document.
> 
> [An increasingly tricky set of examples]
> >
> I just don't see a way that we can specify how a processor should do
> this: you need the intelligence of the person writing the pipeline to
> be able to tell which namespaces need to be used, which means we need:

Agreed.

>   (a) a way of passing in namespace bindings to either a step (my
> preference) or individual options (which I think is too complicated).

Agreed -- that's what the Markup pipeline language does.  If you
supply an option whose value is/includes prefixed names, you must
accompany it with, as it were, <p:bind prefix="..." namespace="..."/>

>   (b) a way of picking up the namespaces that were in scope when a
> pipeline was invoked

I'm not sure I understand, but maybe this means that if you can
specify option name/value pairs at invociation (e.g. on the command
line), you need to be able to specify prefix bindings as well, in
which case I agree.

>   (c) a way of getting the in-scope namespace declarations within a
> pipeline, in order to use those in the set that you then pass into
> another step (this can be done with a <p:namespaces> step analogous to
> the <p:parameters> one).

I don't see the need for this. . .

ht
- -- 
 Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
                     Half-time member of W3C Team
    2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
            Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                   URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGZ9KykjnJixAXWBoRAtBEAJ9sJ9huR4pLkV0GXpX1erjkenywSwCdEjL9
D5ddErBxBWfZKHi0Xd50pww=
=Gda3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 09:41:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:53 GMT