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

Re: [closed] Re: output ports of choose, try

From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 15:37:07 +0100
To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <f5bd4vvj698.fsf@hildegard.inf.ed.ac.uk>

Hash: SHA1

Norman Walsh writes:

> / Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk> was heard to say:
> |> I think the paragraph that reads
> |> 
> |>   The result of the p:choose is the result of the selected subpipeline.
> |> 
> |> is supposed to say that. I expanded that paragraph to read:
> |> 
> |>   The outputs of the p:choose are copies of the outputs of the
> |>   selected subpipeline. The p:choose has the same number of outputs as
> |>   the selected subpipeline with the same names. If the selected
> |>   subpipeline has a primary output port, the port with the same name
> |>   on the p:choose is also a primary output port.
> |> 
> |> I amended the description of p:try in a similar way.
> |
> | That looks good.

Sorry to niggle, but "a _copy_"?  I guess you're being casual, but you
don't really want to introduce the uncertainty which that will induce
in implementors, do you?  Why not

 "The outputs of the p:choose are taken from the outputs . . ."

I'm now thinking I should search for 'copy' in the spec. . .

- -- 
 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]
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

Received on Thursday, 4 October 2007 14:37:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:44 UTC