- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:32:55 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2lk8fluyg.fsf@nwalsh.com>
In private email, I was asked: | 4.1 In some cases, compound steps can contain implicit primary output | ("result") that is created when the compound has no declared output step | and the last step of the subpipeline has an unbound primary output (spec | section 2.3). How does a declaration of this primary output look like? | In our implementation, the implicit primary output always accept | sequences of documents (sequence="true") I replied: I think that needs to be made more clear. I think it should inherit the properties of the output declaration on the last step. So if the last step produces a sequence, then so does it, but not otherwise. Anyone disagree? Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | A life, admirable at first sight, may http://nwalsh.com/ | have cost so much in imposed | liabilities, chores and self-abasement, | that, brilliant though it appears, it | cannot be considered other than a | failure. Another, which seems to have | misfired, is in reality a triumphant | success, because it has cost so | little.--Henry De Montherlant
Received on Friday, 30 November 2007 13:33:07 UTC