- From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
- Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:59:06 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Cc: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
OK, let me rephrase the question... I note a copyright at exproc.org. Whom can authorize that material being copied into the Requirements WD? I have already incorporated the material. I have not taken such liberties with documentation-related material from EMC, although I was tempted. Murray Maloney murray@muzmo.com muzmo@me.com On 2012-04-13, at 10:34 AM, Murray Maloney wrote: > Folks (especially Norm and Alex), > > I just discovered http://exproc.org/proposed/ > > I see that a lot of writing work has been done to justify many of the proposed steps that are listed in the requirements WD. > > My question is: Should I incorporate that material in the WD or simply point at it? > > On 2012-04-12, at 7:32 AM, James Fuller wrote: > >> here is an example pipeline that satisfies this use case. >> >> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> >> <p:declare-step >> xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step" >> xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc" >> xmlns:cx="http://xmlcalabash.com/ns/extensions" >> version="1.0" >> exclude-inline-prefixes="cx c p"> >> <p:input port="source"> >> <p:inline><test/> >> </p:inline> >> </p:input> >> <p:output port="result"/> >> <p:exec command="/bin/cat" result-is-xml="true"/> >> </p:declare-step> >> >> will generate >> >> <c:result xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step"><test/></c:result> >> >> Jim Fuller >> > >
Received on Sunday, 15 April 2012 21:59:36 UTC