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

Re: Thoughts on cx:zip

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 14:55:34 +0100
Message-ID: <711a73df0905260655n63d95e39hb3108e42e2f78e29@mail.gmail.com>
To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Cc: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
2009/5/26 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>:

>
> The idea is that the manifest says what to do. The step takes the
> documents identified by the @href's in the manifest and puts them in
> the zip file with the names specified by the @name's.

-1, but only if you are considering the idea of XSLT style variables?
Using indirection via a manifest I lose the ability to list out the
files using variables which the implementation has resolved?
How to get dir/dir/*.xml ?

I'm thinking of ant's fileset? Is that too much?



>
> If one of the source documents has the same base URI as one of the
> @href's, then that document gets serialized and stored in the zip.
> Otherwise, the specified @href gets read and stored.
>
> For 'create', the zip file is replaced by the new contents.
>
> For 'update' and 'freshen', entries in the zip file not mentioned in
> the manifest are left unchanged.

update != refresh? Sounds the same?


>
> For 'freshen', the entry in the zip file is replaced only if the entry
> in the manifest is newer (or if the entry will come from the source
> port, which is always assumed to be newer).

sounds the same as update




regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 13:56:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 May 2009 13:56:15 GMT