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

Re: Do pipelines have ports?

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 09:32:14 -0400
To: "Florent Georges" <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
Cc: Toman_Vojtech@emc.com, xproc-dev@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2d4j0qn1d.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Florent Georges" <fgeorges@fgeorges.org> writes:

>> What about this (see Section 4.1, p:pipeline):
>> [...]
>> <p:declare-step some-attributes>
>>   <p:input port='source' primary='true'/>
>>   <p:input port='parameters' kind='parameters' primary='true'/>
>   I think this is a defect in the WD (to have two inputs
> where @primary = true).  See:
>     http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc/#dt-primary-input-port
>     "A step can have at most one primary input port."

Uhm. Yeah, I see your point. When we adopted parameter input ports to
simplify the previous, broken tangle of prose that dealt with
parameters, we did introduce this slight irregularity.

I'm not sure what to do about it. I suppose some explicit discussion
of this fact would be a start.

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | We look back on our life as a thing of
http://nwalsh.com/            | broken pieces, because our mistakes and
                              | failures are always the first to strike
                              | us, and outweigh in our imagination
                              | what we have accomplished and
                              | attained.-- Goethe

Received on Friday, 19 September 2008 13:32:57 UTC

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