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

Re: No more automagic inheritance

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 16:13:16 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2vcfgqpeb.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Murray Maloney <murray@muzmo.com> writes:

>> The implementors could invent mechanisms for passing them in.
>> 
>>  calabash ... -p p:xslt/$initial-mode=fred
>> 
>> I don't know.
>
> So, does this -p expression say "whenever p:XSLT is run, set its
> initial-mode parameter to the string 'fred'?"

Yes, basically. I'd have to invent a more expressive syntax to give
the user complete control, but the important bit is we wouldn't have
to standardize it.

> It seems a bit obfuscatory. If the called step is modified later,
> adding another call to p:xslt that doesn't need or want the 'fred'
> parameter, then what?

Then you'd need something more sophisticated in the commmand line.

  -p /p:pipeline/p:xslt[1]/$initial-mode=fred \
  -p /p:pipeline/p:group/p:xslt[3]/$other-param=15

> The step author has to plan for parameters that
> might be passed to it through Calabash.

No, the point here is to give the user who *runs* the pipeline the
ability to pass in parameters even when the pipeline author didn't
plan ahead.

> Does the step author have a way to allow/forbid extra params?

In the current, 1.0 specification, yes. In the design I'm outlining
here, no.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 512 761 6676
www.marklogic.com

Received on Friday, 14 September 2012 21:13:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 14 September 2012 21:13:48 GMT