W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > April 2010

RE: Proposed extension libraries

From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:51:13 -0400
Message-ID: <997C307BEB90984EBE935699389EC41C0125F147@CORPUSMX70C.corp.emc.com>
To: <xproc-dev@w3.org>
> > Also, do you expect that the EXProc extensions will be available out
> > the box (in processors that implement them), or that the users will
> > to import a special EXProc library - and if so, what would be its
> You have to import a library. I was imagining that we'd wind up with
> something like http://exproc.org/steps/fileutils.xpl but of course,
> implementations would be encouraged to recognize that URI and load the
> values from some cached location so that every attempt to use the
> exproc steps doesn't actually require hitting the web.

That makes sense to me. How do you enable the EXProc steps in Calabash
now? Or are you still using the Calabash-specific libraries/namespaces
for the EXProc steps? Or do you already support the
http://exproc.org/steps/... import URIs?

I am just working on enabling the EXProc steps/functions in Calumet, so
I think it is the right time to agree on some kind of "standard" EXProc
import URIs. Maybe we will have to use special URIs for the "proposed"
functionality first, but that is fine with me.

Received on Monday, 19 April 2010 12:54:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:06 UTC