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

Re: p:for-each

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:04:58 -0500
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <m2tz8v56np.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:

> The phrase ' sequence of documents', along with sequence, is
> not defined. On that basis I'm free to take any interpretation
> that seems reasonable to me?

Ok. I'll attempt to draft some text to clarify the meaning of
'document' and 'sequence of documents'.

>> In the case of Calabash, you can use -isource multiple times to make a
>> sequence. Perhaps I should also allow -isource=*.xml, I think that
>> makes sense.
>
> I went looking for 'collection' as per XSLT 2.0, but failed to find it.

No, there are no collections. Collections are unordered, but document
sequences are ordered. More reasons to make the definition more
explicit, clearly.

> IMHO working with a collection of XML files on disk is sufficiently
> common to warrant being addressed as a source of XML.

I agree that implementations should make that easy.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Man's sensitivity to little things and
http://nwalsh.com/            | insensitivity to the greatest are the
                              | signs of a strange disorder.-- Pascal

Received on Tuesday, 23 December 2008 14:05:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 December 2008 14:05:46 GMT