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

Re: Extensibility questions

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 17:05:55 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2tzh4d00c.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| 1) I want to add a PROPRIETARY NON REQUIRED option to an existing xproc step ?
| 2) I want to add a PROPRIETARY NON REQUIRED input port to an existing
| xproc step ?
| 3) I want to add a PROPRIETARY NON REQUIRED parameter input port to an
| existing xproc step ?
| 4) I want to add a PROPRIETARY NON REQUIRED output port to an existing
| xproc step ?
|
| For each one, how can I do that, and if I can't which error is thrown ?

I don't think you can change the signature of any step in the XProc
namespace.

| Following is a an example for 1)
|
| 1) for example : p:count, with xmlns:my="http://my.site.com/ns/"
|
| a) Is this valid ?
| <p:count my:option="myvalue"/>

Yes, but my:option is an extension attribute, not an option.

| b) ..or this ?
| <p:count>
| <p:with-option name="my:option" select="'myvalue'"/>
| </p:count>

Nope.

| c) ..or this ?
| <p:count>
| <p:pipeinfo>
| <p:with-option name="my:option" select="'myvalue'"/>
| </p:pipeinfo>
| </p:count>

That's legal. But it doesn't have any defined semantics.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The worst enemy of life, freedom and
http://nwalsh.com/            | the common decencies is total anarchy;
                              | their second worst enemy is total
                              | efficiency.--Aldous Huxley

Received on Sunday, 11 May 2008 21:06:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 11 May 2008 21:06:34 GMT