- From: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 10:25:23 +0100
- To: <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
1. Technical (but non-normative). Fig 1 Example. Since the example is trying to illustrate that a pipeline takes XML documents as input, it would be better if the input consisted of "schema documents" rather than "schemas". (A schema document is an XML document, a schema is not). 2. Nomenclature. "validate-xml-schema" is a misleading name for a step that validates an instance. 3. Clarification. It becomes clear later, but it's confusing to read in the first para of section 2 that a pipeline contains no loops, and in the fourth para of 2.1 that a compound step may contain (or "reconstruct") an iterator. 4. Clarification. In 2.1 it's hard to reconcile the definition [Definition: The steps (and the connections between them) within a compound step form a subpipeline.] with the next sentence "A compound step can contain one or more subpipelines". If the steps form one subpipeline then how can the compound step contain many subpipelines? Are we talking about transitive containment here? 5. Clarification. At the end of 2.1, "A step can have zero parameter input ports, and each parameter port can have zero parameters passed on it." it might be clearer to say "A step can have zero, one, or many parameter input ports, and each parameter port can have zero or one parameters passed on it.". 6. Clarification. In 2.2, I don't understand this: "Within a compound step, the declared outputs of the step can be connected to: * The output port of some contained step. * A fixed, inline document or sequence of documents. * A document read from a URI." How can an output of a step be a document read from a URI? 7. Technical. In 2.5, Parameters, it seems unnecessarily constraining to require that the value of a parameter be a string. In XSLT, for example, it is common for a parameter to have a document as its value. 8. Technical. By the time I get to 2.6, I'm wondering what precisely the spec means by an "XML Document". An Infoset? A PSVI? 9. Technical. In 2.7, the Environment is defined as containing static information. And it includes options. But I don't think it's true that the values of the options are known statically, is it? 10. Typo. In 2.8 para 4, "step step". 11. Technical 2.8.1. Making the default context node an "empty document node" is probably a mistake; you would want to make the decision differently with XPath 2.0, and it will be hard to change later. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Received on Saturday, 22 September 2007 09:25:35 UTC