- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 21:18:47 +0100
- To: Sharon Adler <sca@us.ibm.com>
- CC: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Hi Sharon, Sharon Adler wrote: > 1. In using full XPath 1.0 (or 2.0) the XProc specification has some of the > same problems with large documents regarding streaming as we have seen with > with XSLT. Streaming is an important use case for XML processing in > general and in specific any pipeline language should make some provision > for streamability. We also suggest that you consider adding an > indication for each step specifying whether the step is streamable or not. Can you clarify whether the XSL WG is suggesting (a) that the definitions of the steps defined by XProc (ie in the standard step library) include an indication of whether each step is streamable, or (b) a facility for authors to indicate whether a particular *invocation* of a step is streamable? > 3. The XProc specification does not make it clear if parallel executions > are handled. (Currently there is implicit parallelism based on connection > between steps.) This would be a problem for any task involving multiple > processing steps on top of streams. I don't understand this point (probably someone else on the XProc WG will, but I'll ask anyway). Can you (or anyone) expand, perhaps with an example? Thanks, Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2007 20:18:59 UTC