- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:40:39 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
2008/8/27 Norman Walsh wrote:
Hi
> The only place they're allowed is in a subpipeline where they
> must have a corresponding declaration (as they must be atomic
> steps).
So you've chosen to not reuse the concepts of "user-defined
data elements" [1] and "extension instructions" [2,3] from XSLT
(both 1.0 & 2.0)? :
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#dt-data-element
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#dt-extension-instruction
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#extension-instruction
The former has proved very useful for little "extensions" to
the language, for example regarding documentation, or meta
information (for instance mapping from the business rules
documents).
About the later, I don't understand comprehensively and
exactly the extension mechanism of XProc, but I can't think you
didn't allow the ability of declaring extension steps defined
in an implementation-defined way (read: in Java or whatever.)
Regards,
--
Florent Georges
http://www.fgeorges.org/
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2008 08:41:17 UTC