W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > December 2008

declaring an atomic step

From: James Sulak <jsulak@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2008 20:49:36 -0600
Message-ID: <7cb78b3b0812141849s474e6031md9a9aa5f9f2013d3@mail.gmail.com>
To: "XProc Dev" <xproc-dev@w3.org>

>From 5.8.1:

"When declaring an atomic step, the subpipeline in the declaration
must be empty. And, conversely, if the subpipeline in a declaration is
empty, the declaration must be for an atomic step."

Does this mean that this:

<p:pipeline name="new-identity">
  <p:identity />

is technically declaring a compound step, and not an atomic step?  And
if so, is it impossible to declare an atomic step that's not an
extension implemented at the processor level (if that makes sense)?


Received on Monday, 15 December 2008 02:50:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:04 UTC