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

Re: output binding error?

From: James Garriss <james@garriss.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 11:56:39 -0400
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C5027E77.A9C%james@garriss.org>

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>

James Garriss <james@garriss.org> writes:

> So we can't bind an input port in the declaration.  Can we bind one when we
> specify (use) it?  IOW, is this legal pipeline code?

Yes. In fact, *all* inputs must be bound when you *use* a step. If you
don't specify a primary input/output port, it'll get bound

All *primary* output ports must also be bound (implicitly or
explicitly) when you use a step. Output ports that aren't primary can
be left unbound, in which case any data that flows throw them "falls
on the floor" (i.e. gets silently discarded).

Very helpful, thank you!

Received on Friday, 26 September 2008 15:57:24 UTC

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