Re: First pass at filesystem and OS steps note

Comments:

1. pf:copy should allow copying directories.  If it does, it would need to
have an option for recursive copying.

2. More complicated operations for copying and deleting use regex matching.
 Are we going to consider this?  While a slippery slope, copying/deleting
by extension is a common operation.

3. pf:mkdir needs to allow for creation of a whole directory path ancestry
if possible (i.e. like mkdir -p)

4. Are we really going to create namespaces for every additional set of
steps?  We didn't create a new namespace for p:template et. al.  What is
the deciding factor for a new namespace?

Otherwise, this is all a good start.

I would really, really like to avoid a careless proliferation of namespaces
for steps.  We should think hard about how we want to name steps.


On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:

> FYI:
>
> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/fileos/
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh
> Lead Engineer
> MarkLogic Corporation
> Phone: +1 512 761 6676
> www.marklogic.com
>



-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics