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

Re: Thoughts on cx:zip

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 15:51:27 -0400
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <m2ab4ztzgg.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:
> 2009/5/26 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>:
>> Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> 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 ?
>
>>From which I gather you don't support the idea
> of using variables as per XSLT?
>
> A manifest would kill it altogether.

Expressing the manifest as an XML document doesn't prevent
indirection. The question is, what's the best way to provide that
indirection.

> So no indirection in xproc?

If by "indirection" you mean the ability to compute the manifest at
runtime, using either variables/parameters or a list of the current
files on disk, then you can absolutely use indirection.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Every vice you destroy has a
http://nwalsh.com/            | corresponding virtue, which perishes
                              | along with it.--Anatole France

Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 19:52:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 26 May 2009 19:52:07 GMT