Re: An unfulfilled requirement maybe?

/ Vasil Rangelov <boen.robot@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| I was actually close to proposing p:exec too, but then I remembered you once
| saying that the WG decided there should be no abbreviations (the question
| back then was something like "why not p:param" or something), and then I
| thought the expanded "p:execute" sounds way too general, whereas
| "command-line" sounds intuitive enough, not generalized and is not
| abbreviated. 

Ok, we can leave picking the names until later :-)

| Oh, and one last thing I forgot when I suggested this. Implementations
| should probably be allowed to read additional non standard streams, provided
| they mark them in c:other element within the c:result element.

I prototyped a slightly different model:

<p:declare-step type="px:exec">
  <p:input port="stdin"/>
  <p:output port="stdout" primary="true"/>
  <p:output port="stderr"/>
  <p:option name="command" required="true"/>
  <p:option name="args"/>
  <p:option name="wrap-stdout-lines" value="false"/>
  <p:option name="wrap-stderr-lines" value="false"/>
</p:declare-step>

It seems to work pretty well, naming aside.

I'm tempted to suggest a "stdout-is-xml" option that treats stdout as
XML and returns a document. But maybe it's ok to just require the
unescape-markup step. You could always write your own pipeline to do
that.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything should be made as simple as
http://nwalsh.com/            | possible, but no simpler.