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

Empty compound steps

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 10:37:50 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <87d51b8jpd.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Currently, we allow empty compound steps. Is that really necessary? I
think it'd be clearer if we required that a compound step contain at
least one step in its subpipeline.

The only use case that I recall is generated content. If that's really
a problem, I think I'd rather have an atomic p:nop component that does

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | All our foes are mortal.--Paul Valéry
http://nwalsh.com/            | 

Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2007 14:38:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:43 UTC