- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 15:10:21 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
Received on Sunday, 21 December 2008 20:11:08 UTC
"Vasil Rangelov" <boen.robot@gmail.com> writes: > To me, it's not clear from this how should the processor behave if the step > actually produces an output on that port. Does the binding only get used as > a default, or does it override anything the step might have otherwise > produced on that port? Whatever the case, it should be said explicitly. > > (Personally, I'd prefer for the binding to be used as a default) You can only put a binding inside a p:output on a compound step, in which case the result of that binding *is* the output, there's no other way for the step to produce anything on that port. Well, you could make a sequence: <p:output> <p:document .../> <p:pipe step="somechildstep" port="result"/> </p:output> Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Design and programming are human http://nwalsh.com/ | activities; forget that and all is | lost.--B. Stroustrup
Received on Sunday, 21 December 2008 20:11:08 UTC