Re: overloading definition in p:pipeline

/ "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| 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>

Those are all errors.

  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.

You cannot have an explicit declaration for the 'source' input port
or the 'result' output port.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Thanks to words, we have been able to
http://nwalsh.com/            | rise above the brutes; and thanks to
                              | words, we have often sunk to the level
                              | of the demons.--Aldous Huxley