W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Ideas for future XProc versions

From: Olivier Jeulin <olivier.jeulin@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 08:07:23 +0100
Message-ID: <4D79CA2B.6020000@gmail.com>
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Le 10/03/2011 17:04, Tony R. a écrit :
> Hello everyone!

Hello,

> *****
> <!--
>     ALTERNATE SYNTAX FOR p:pipe (pipe() FUNCTION)
> ================================================================= -->
> *<input *port = "source" href = "pipe('step-name','port-name')" */> *
> ***<!--    defaults to primary output    -->* **
> ****<input * port = "source"  href = "pipe('step-name')" */> **

This doesn't look like an improvement.
With the XML syntax, your favorite editor can suggest the name of the 
port and of the step. Your editor may also provides color highlighting 
for the attributes' name and value, which makes the pipe's step and port 
more explicit.

> <!--
>     ALTERNATE SYNTAX FOR p:empty (empty() FUNCTION)
> ================================================================= -->
> *<input *  port = "source"   href = "empty()" */> *
> <!--    …or…    -->
> *<input *  port = "source"   empty = "true" */> *

I would use
<p:input port="source"/>

If the input is empty, well, just make it an empty XML element (I still 
don't understand why the spec didn't allow that :)).

-- 
Regards,
Olivier Jeulin
Received on Friday, 11 March 2011 07:07:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 11 March 2011 07:07:58 GMT