- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 23:15:12 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > / "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. Am I allowed to change the behaviour of step with that extension attribute ? > > > | b) ..or this ? > | <p:count> > | <p:with-option name="my:option" select="'myvalue'"/> > | </p:count> > > Nope. Yeah ! I do think the same, but don't see clearly where it is not allowed in the spec ... > > > | 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. Same as above, am I allowed to change the behaviour of step with that p:pipeinfo ? 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 Sunday, 11 May 2008 21:15:46 UTC