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

Re: <input> for <pipeline> (action A-87-01)

From: Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:05:02 +0000 (GMT)
To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>, public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <20071113150502.77172287019@macpro.inf.ed.ac.uk>

> I think the consequences of this proposal are:
> 
> 1. A top-level p:pipeline can provide defaults for all of its inputs,
> be they primary or not.
> 
> 2. A p:declare-step or a p:pipeline in a library can define defaults
> for all of its inputs, be they primary or not, but defining a default
> for a primary input is a no-op. It's never used since the the step,
> when it's called, will always bind the primary input port to the
> default readable port (or cause a static error).

1a. A default on a primary input of a top-level p:pipeline will never
be used when the pipeline is called recursively, for the same reason
as (2).

-- Richard
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 15:05:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:54 GMT