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

Re: (atomic/compound) steps, containers and related issues

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:54:44 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m21w68auyj.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ ht@inf.ed.ac.uk (Henry S. Thompson) was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh writes:
|> I think I finessed this by defining "container" and "contained steps"
|> such that the intervening non-step wrappers are transparent. That is,
|> the container for a px:foo inside a p:for-each is the p:for-each; the
|> container for a px:bar inside a p:when is the p:choose above the
|> p:when.
| Where?  The definitions of _contained step_ and _container_ are
| expressed in terms of immediate containment. . .

In the revised section 2.1 from this morning (after I replied to your

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Where it is permissible both to die and
http://nwalsh.com/            | not to die, it is an abuse of valour to
                              | die.-- Mencius

Received on Tuesday, 18 March 2008 15:55:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:45 UTC