- From: Toman, Vojtech <vojtech.toman@emc.com>
- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 07:53:59 -0500
- To: XProc WG <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
> We need to provide an addressing schema which clearly shows that this is > not xpath ... but its difficult. I have assembled a few thoughts below; > > * not-matched@mystep seems ok but unsure about the usage of 2 ncnames > as localpart@(FQ)DN ... I like it > > * otherwise the alternatives are slippery slope > * avoid dot style, eg. clashes with our default step naming !1.1.1 > * avoid colon and usage w/ 2 ncnames, clashes with definition of qualified > name > * xml:id (idrefs) ... #mystep:not-matched has its merits, but unattractive > * xlink equally unattractive > Sorry if this has been suggested (and rejected) before, but what about a 'fragment-identifier'-like scheme: step-name#port-name The step-name part is always unique within the current context, and the same applies to the port-name 'fragment': port names are unique in the scope of a step. Maybe, but just maybe, we could go even further and interpret the value of the @pipe attribute as an URI, which would allow us to point to external resources without having to use p:document. (Also, but that's probably just my problem, for reasons I cannot quite explain I feel uncomfortable with the reversed port@step syntax.) Regards, Vojtech
Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2014 12:54:40 UTC