- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 18:17:06 +0000
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Further to the whole question of versioning. . . 3.8 [1] appears to me to contradict itself: "An element is only an extension element if it is an ignorable element that occurs as a direct child of a p:pipeline or p:pipeline-library." "[E]lements in a subpipeline are interpreted as follows. . . 2. Is in ignorable namespace? a. Is a known extension? Process as appropriate." How can an element in a sub-pipeline be a direct child of p:pipeline? I know I originally proposed the interpretation bullets, but I'm still confused. . . Looking at the RNG schema, and other parts of the spec., I _think_ the editor's intent was to allow extensions only in subpipelines, as a way of allowing for . . . extensions. But that is completely at odds with the following from the beginning of 3.8: "The presence of an extension element must not cause the connections between steps to differ from the connections that any other conformant XProc processor would produce." Such a constraint would render any extension useless, as far as I can tell. Maybe this all is moot, as this aspect of the spec. has to be revisited in light of our proposal wrt language evolution at the f2f [2], discussion wrt Comment 15. [Actually, I've excerpted that discussion and replied to the Comment 15 thread with it, and then sent _this_ message in the resulting thread . . .] ht [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#extension-elements [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Nov/0031.html - -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHRcejkjnJixAXWBoRAvFyAJ9QvsWB+iANBXbaaeHwTSnPgkGjZgCfSG7K 8+3uWDPKUSnfwvvVOYAC68Y= =BCkr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2007 18:17:25 UTC