W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > January 2012

Re: why not in p:exec ... ""If cwd is not specified, the cwd is the same as the xproc file one is running."?

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 16:59:18 -0500
To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <m2r4yze2bt.fsf@nwalsh.com>
David Lee <dlee@calldei.com> writes:
> Not speaking for the WG ... but  it won't keep me from speaking :)

You know, you work for a member company now, ...

> 1) The XProc "file" may not be a file, it could be
>
> A) In a database (such as EMC  ...)
>
> B) Prepared dynamically
>
> D) Directly fetched/executed off the internet (http:// ... ) 
>
> 2) Not all OS's *HAVE* the notion of a CWD.   For example Windows Mobile has no concept of a
> CWD.

Yes, those are the sorts of reasons that the WG didn't attempt to specify
the CWD.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

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

Received on Monday, 16 January 2012 21:59:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 January 2012 21:59:54 GMT