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

RE: overloading definition in p:pipeline

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:43:43 -0400
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC7870BC3B12D@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
I think that only the first pipeline is a valid XProc pipeline. The other two will be rejected because you can't change the properties of the default input ("source") and output ("result") ports. The properties of the default input/output ports are primary="true" and sequence="false". 
 
...but a strange thing is that I can't find any relevant text about this in the spec even though I thought there was some text about it in section 4.1 (p:pipeline). And as I am thinking about it now, I am also not sure now whether you can specify <p:input port="source"/> or <p:input port="source" primary="true"/> in p:pipeline *at all*.
 
I had a similar question in the past (1/25/2008, Comments on Editor's Draft 9 January 2008). This was the reply:
 
| 5.Section 4.1 (p:pipeline): "All p:pipeline pipelines have an implicit
| primary input port named "source' and an implicit primary output port
| named "result". Any input or output ports that the p:pipeline declares
| explicitly are in addition to those ports and may not be declared
| primary."
|
| So, is it allowed to explicitly specify the implicit input/output ports
| inside p:pipeline? If so, is it possible to redefine their properties
| (primary, sequence)? Is the following permitted?
|
| <p:pipeline>
|   <p:input port="source" sequence="false"/>
|   <p:output port="result" primary="false"/>
|   <p:output port="result2" primary="true"/>
|   ...
| </p:pipeline>
 
No. The implicit declarations of source/result cannot be repeated or
changed. Of course, you can use p:declare-step if you want to have
different values.
 
--
 
So it seems to me that this requirement (plus also the properties of the implicit "source" and "result" ports) didn't make it to the spec. Or perhaps I just can't find it right now...
 
Vojtech
 
 
 


________________________________

	From: public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-processing-model-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Innovimax SARL
	Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 1:03 PM
	To: XProc WG
	Subject: overloading definition in p:pipeline
	
	
	What should be the behaviour of the XProc processor vis-à-vis the following pipeline ?
	
	<p:pipeline name="pipeline" xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
	  <p:input port="source" primary="true"/>
	  <p:input port="schemas" sequence="true"/>
	  :
	</p:pipeline>
	
	and vis-à-vis the following one ?
	
	<p:pipeline name="pipeline" xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
	  <p:input port="source" primary="true" sequence="true"/>
	  <p:input port="schemas" sequence="true"/>
	  :
	</p:pipeline>
	
	and lastly vis-à-vis the following one ?
	
	<p:pipeline name="pipeline" xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
	  <p:input port="source" primary="false" sequence="true"/>
	  <p:input port="schemas" sequence="true"/>
	  :
	</p:pipeline>
	
	Regards,
	
	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 Monday, 14 July 2008 11:44:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 14 July 2008 11:44:29 GMT