W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: XProc V.next Requirements and Use Cases - 5.9 Run a Custom Program

From: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:59:06 -0700
Cc: Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com>
Message-Id: <FDCEA239-EF2A-4ED4-850B-09240CC71D47@muzmo.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
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 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 15 April 2012 21:59:37 GMT