Re: Another take on versioning

guys/gals,

isnt it late to be considering such changes at this late stage ?

Jim Fuller

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:47 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote:
> Norm,
>
> On 9 Oct 2009, at 21:57, Norman Walsh wrote:
>>
>> Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> writes:
>>>
>>> So here's
>>> my dumb question: the only outputs that you need to care about are the
>>> ones that are connected, so couldn't a processor work out what outputs
>>> a step is supposed to have based on the connections to those outputs?
>>
>> Could it?
>
> I did say it was a dumb question. There's always a disconnect between the
> user's "surely it should work like..." and the implementer's "no, it has to
> work like..."
>
> I was really thinking about explicit connections (ie not to primary ports)
> directly to XProc steps. I think it's reasonable to constrain future
> versions not to add primary ports to existing steps, if that helps any.
>
> Jeni
> --
> Jeni Tennison
> http://www.jenitennison.com
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 10 October 2009 10:49:36 UTC