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

Re: Proposed extension libraries

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 06:51:19 -0700
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <m2mxxrdync.fsf@nwalsh.com>
"Toman_Vojtech@emc.com" <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com> writes:
>> 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.
>
> Since the EXProc "package" specifies both extension steps and extension
> XPath functions, we will need to say that importing the EXProc libraries
> will also magically enable a couple of XPath extension functions. So I
> think that EXProc compliant processors will have to recognize the EXProc
> library URIs in any case - and actually do something more than just a
> simple import (as defined in the XProc spec.)

Well, I think a processor could choose to support the fileutils library
of extension steps without supporting any additional packaging system or 
functions.


                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Look for the ridiculous in everything
http://nwalsh.com/            | and you will find it.--Jules Renard

Received on Monday, 29 March 2010 13:51:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 29 March 2010 13:51:58 GMT