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

Re: XProc Usability (was Re: New to Xproc Question : conditionnal "output port" definition?)

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:18:16 -0400
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <m2vcrucenb.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Alex Muir <alex.g.muir@gmail.com> writes:
> So you could have some <p:put  id="fish"> when  <p:get name="fish> or
> <p:put-many... get-many to create or iterate on a collection. clearly
> that concept could be expanded upon

The base URI of the document already provides the ID, I think. (It's
not always exactly what you want but has the huge advantage that you
can retrieve it from the cache in a href="" statement in some
stylesheet or XInclude statement.)

In fact, XML Calabash implements this if you use my caching resolver.

> Also there is something complex about input/results and ports that
> probably could be simplified. Does a developer really want to be
> bothered with a message that you need to specify your result
> differently somehow somewhere in the document... (been a while so I'm
> not being specific here) But really for the most part I tend to think
> what is coming out of the last step or what I specify to save in some
> location is what is specifying the result of a pipeline not some
> declaration at the top of the document for example..

The default is to use the last step, so I think I'd need a concrete
example to understand your point.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 413 624 6676
www.marklogic.com

Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2011 17:18:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 October 2011 17:18:46 GMT