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

RE: The default readable port in a for-each?

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 08:10:10 -0400
Message-ID: <6E216CCE0679B5489A61125D0EFEC7870D2EB9EF@CORPUSMX10A.corp.emc.com>
To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
I agree with Mohamed on this one. And, obviously, the same applies to p:viewport as well.
 
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: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 12:35 PM
	To: Norman Walsh
	Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
	Subject: Re: The default readable port in a for-each?
	
	
	Well
	
	I would say it is covered by
	
	2.5 Environnement
	
	[[
	

	*	If there is a preceding sibling step element:

		*	If that preceding sibling has a primary output port <http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#dt-primary-output-port> , then that output port becomes the default readable port <http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#dt-default-readable-port> .

		*	Otherwise, the default readable port <http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#dt-default-readable-port>  is undefined.

	]]
	
	That means that the input of "second" is the output of "first"
	
	Mohamed
	
	
	On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
	

		Consider:
		
		 <p:for-each>
		   <p:identity name="first"/>
		   <p:identity name="second"/>
		 </p:for-each>
		
		The description of p:for-each says:
		
		 The environment inherited by the contained steps of a p:for-each is
		 the inherited environment with these modifications:
		   * The port named "current" on the p:for-each is added to the
		     readable ports.
		   * The port named "current" on the p:for-each is made the default
		     readable port.
		
		In the case of the identity step named "first", this clearly has the
		desired consequence: first reads the current port of the loop.
		
		In the case of the identity step named "second", to what is the
		"source" port bound?
		
		I think our spec currently says that it's bound to the current port of
		the loop, but I'm not sure that's what we want.
		
		                                       Be seeing you,
		                                         norm
		
		--
		Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Language is by its very nature a
		http://nwalsh.com/            | communal thing; that is, it expresses
		                             | never the exact thing but a
		                             | compromise--that which is common to
		                             | you, me, and everybody.--T. E. Hulme
		




	-- 
	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 Tuesday, 28 October 2008 12:11:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 28 October 2008 12:11:09 GMT