W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > May 2009

Re: xproc as an alternative to Apache ant

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2009 14:24:35 +0100
Message-ID: <711a73df0905240624k3fd014bbhb5d856dbe04b953d@mail.gmail.com>
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
2009/5/24 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>:
> Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> http://www.dpawson.co.uk/nodesets/entries/090524.html
>>
>> Just my thoughts. I'd appreciate yours.
>
> My immediate thoughts, posted as a comment:
>
>  XProc absolutely supports runtime options that can act like
>  properties and variables in ant and bash.

As per xslt params/variables? So I could import them
from an external file and use them?




You can, with an
>  (existing) extension step generate a pipeline and then evaluate it,
>  but I really think you're making the whole process way more
>  complicated than it needs to be. I will (hopefully this weekend)
>  take a closer look at your ant setup and derive an equivalent XProc
>  pipeline.

Possibly. If xproc is 'smarter' then great, I'm willing to learn.




>
>  There's already a p:exec step in XProc 1.0, so I don't think that's
>  exactly out of scope.

So I could run the Python script and obtain the exit code,
hence terminate on failure?

>
>  I don't think it would be unreasonable for p:http-request to
>  support FTP uploading, though I haven't tried to make that work in
>  XML Calabash. I'll put it on the list.

Is that twisting http a bit?
p:ftp seems a better name?


>
>  I also don't see any problem with a px:zip step, though I'd want to
>  think carefully about how it should work. Ideally it would allow you
>  to both create new archives as well as update existing archives.

The ant zip task seems pretty comprehensive to me?
http://ant.apache.org/manual/CoreTasks/zip.html



>
>  I remain convinced that most of what you want to do is right in
>  XProc's sweet spot. The parts that aren't are also entirely
>  reasonable, with a few extensions.

Glad to have an experts view. Agreed the task may change
when brought over to xproc.


>
>  I don't mind using extensions. That will help the community learn
>  what additional steps should be in the V.next standard. That strikes
>  me as better than trying to put the kitchen sink in V1.0.


+1, as per exslt.


regards




-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Sunday, 24 May 2009 13:25:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 24 May 2009 13:25:11 GMT