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

Re: Editorial comments on Last Call Draft

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 15:39:33 +0200
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0710030639g7c599237l39c2116072e6a32@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org

On 10/3/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
> | On 10/3/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> |> | In 2.3 Primary Inputs and Outputs
> |> |
> |> | Please add the same précaution for "source" and "result" than the
> |> | following in 2.5 Parameters
> |> | [[
> |> | (If the pipeline declares an ordinary input named "parameters", the
> |> | implicit primary parameter input port will be named "parameters1". If
> |> | that's not available, then "parameters2", etc. until an available name
> |> | is found.)
> |> | ]]
> |>
> |> I don't think that's really necessary. It's not going to matter to
> |> anyone unless they use parameters.
> |
> | Ok my point was that you make such precaution for parameters than you
> | haven't done for input port="source" and output port="result"
> | That mean, in case of a name conflict which name do you generate for
> | default input and default output ?
>
> There can't be a conflict in those cases, default input and output
> ports are only added to a p:pipeline if it has no input or output.
> So the names "source" and "result" will always be unique.

Fair enough !

>
> |> | In 3 Syntax Overview
> |> |
> |> | Please add Parameter Input ports to this list
> |> | [[
> |> | Six kinds of things are named in XProc:
> |> |
> |> |    1. Step types,
> |> |    2. Steps,
> |> |    3. Input ports,
> |> |    4. Output ports,
> |> |    5. Options, and
> |> |    6. Parameters
> |> | ]]
> |>
> |> I think of parameter input ports as a kind of input port. So I think
> |> item 3 covers it, but if you feel strongly about it, I won't put up a
> |> fight :-)
> |
> | I make this point because you seem everywhere in the spec to speak
> | separatly of "input ports" and "parameter input ports", so to be
> | consistent, it will be better
>
> Ok. How about
>
>   ...
>   Input ports (both parameter and document),
>   ...

Fine

Mohamed
-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 13:39:53 GMT

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