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

Remarks on W3C Editor's Draft 24 January 2008 ( part III)

From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:58:10 +0100
Message-ID: <546c6c1c0801251458r4a6b0b36s2873504c11ff931a@mail.gmail.com>
To: "XProc WG" <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Dear,

In 2.3 Primary Inputs and Outputs

Please precise explicitely that we cannot have more than one primary input
or more than one primary output

--

Idem for 2.5 Parameters

--

s/If the pipeline declares another port named "parameters",/If the pipeline
declares another (non parameter) port named "parameters",/

s/to parameters accepted by the p:pipeline is/to parameters accepted by the
p:pipeline or p:declare-step is/
s/The attribute xpath-version may be used on p:pipeline (or p:library)/The
attribute xpath-version may be used on p:pipeline or p:declare-step (or
p:library)/

May be a complete checking of "p:pipeline" should be done to replace it by
"p:pipeline or p:declare-step"
--

[[
 that are visible to the step
 ]]
 I fear that visible is not defined

 --

 In 2.7 Environment

 it is not clear of what happen in case of shadowed input or output port
names

 ---
 [[
 cannot determine will give the same result in XPath 1.0 that it would have
given if XPath 2.0 had been used
 ]]
 is it possible to point to a spec for this sentence ?
 --

 [[
 The XPath 2.0 functions and the
 ]]
 please put a reference to XPath 2.0 functions and Operators
 --
 Idem for "The XPath 2.0 functions."
 --
In 2.8.3.1 System Properties

We should define that String for XPath 1.0 is xs:string for XPath 2.0
--
In 2.8.3.2 Step Available
Boolean should refer to xs:boolean for XPath 2.0
--
Integer should be defined (as number for XPath 1.0 and xs:integer for XPath
2.0)

--
This sentence
[[
All the step types in a pipeline must have unique names: it is a static
error (err:XS0036) if any step type name is built-in and/or declared or
defined more than once in the same scope.
]]

is a bit troublesome : what is "in the same scope" ? it is clear that there
is a scope for "step names" but not clear for "step types".

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 Friday, 25 January 2008 22:58:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 January 2008 22:58:21 GMT