Re: Alternate "parameters" draft

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

Norman Walsh writes:

> / ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) was heard to say:
> | I have an alternate proposal, which I believe is both much simpler to
> | explain and to implement, and which provides all the functionality of
> | the current 'alternative' [2]:
> |
> |  To the _status quo_ (inherited, scoped, individual parameter
> |  bindings, per [1] as of 10 May), simply add a single new element,
> |  let's call it p:parameters, allowed once only in all steps (including
>
> Why only once?

Because you don't need it more than once?  I don't care, just seemed simpler.

> With the proviso that local p:parameters override any specified in the
> p:paramters input rather than being an error (as two explicit
> p:parameter elements would be).

Yes.

> It doesn't solve one fundamental problem with the status quo which is
> that all steps still always see all the parameters.
>
> Given:
>
> <p:pipeline>
>   ...
>   <p:xslt name="t1"/>
>   ...
>   <p:xslt name="t2"/>
>   ...
> </p:pipeline>
>
> There's no way for me to pass a parameter "foo" to the pipeline such
> that only t1 will see it.

Without changing the pipeline from the way you've written it, there's
no way in your new proposal either, as far as I can see.

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)

iD8DBQFGVaK9kjnJixAXWBoRAho5AJ0TOMQ7B+4c36t2ZZNx/1YYyMtitACfQbhy
ACM26bu0i3kS23JgAE2RLKw=
=29Ts
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----