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
automatically.

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!

--J
Received on Friday, 26 September 2008 15:57:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 26 September 2008 15:57:24 GMT