W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2008

RE: Names for p:* steps

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 10:56:41 -0400
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC7870C4E71E1@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

> We agree that I can call foo, right:
> 
>   <p:declare-step type="px:my-step" name="foo">
>     <p:input port="source"/>
>     <p:output port="result"/>
>     <p:identity/>
>   </p:declare-step>
> 
> And I can call bar:
> 
>   <p:declare-step type="px:my-atomic-step" name="bar">
>     <p:input port="source"/>
>     <p:output port="result"/>
>   </p:declare-step>
> 
> And I could call baz:
> 
>   <p:declare-step type="px:add-attribute" name="baz">
>     <p:input port="source"/>
>     <p:output port="result"/>
>     <p:option name="match" required="true"/>
>     <p:option name="attribute-name" required="true"/>
>     <p:option name="attribute-value" required="true"/>
>  </p:declare-step>
> 
> But I can't call p:add-attribute? The *only* difference is that
> p:add-attribute doesn't have a name.
> 

Sorry if I am still missing something, but again: why do you need a name
if you know the type? I think that you can remove the @name attributes
from px:my-step, px:my-atomic-step and px:add-attribute and nothing
should change; you should be able to run them with no problems (like
p:add-attributes)... The step types are always unique, so the type is
all you need, IMHO.

Regards,
Vojtech



Regards,
Vojtech
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 14:57:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 August 2008 14:57:34 GMT