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

Re: defaulting

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 19:40:55 +0100
Message-ID: <467C17B7.1040802@jenitennison.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

Richard & Henry wrote:
> Further to discussion during yesterday's telcon, herewith a proposal
> about input and output defaulting for pipelines.

I like this. Just one thing:

>   The default input of a step is bound to the default readable port if
>   it is not otherwise bound;
> 
>   Non-default inputs are only bound to the default readable port if
>   you call for that to happen by writing
>    <p:input port="not-the-default-input-port"/>

The other option would be to say that all inputs are bound to the 
default readable port if they're not explicitly bound, such that

<p:pipeline>
   <p:xslt1 />
</p:pipeline>

accepts an XSLT stylesheet input and runs it on itself (this is actually 
something I do quite a lot).

It would make the defaulting story slightly easier to specify, since an 
omitted input would *always* be equivalent to an empty <p:input> element 
for that port.

Is there any reason not to do that?

Also, I'm assuming that the default readable port after a given step 
would be the default output of the previous step (in document order)?

Jeni
-- 
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Friday, 22 June 2007 18:41:09 GMT

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