W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > February 2014

Re: an idea: ports == options

From: Romain Deltour <rdeltour@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 18:25:02 +0100
Cc: "public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org Comments" <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>, XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-Id: <C2988B17-F101-4448-B3CF-940DE8BCC4D6@gmail.com>
To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
> What about step outputs?

Very good question :)

In one way or another, if XProc starts accepting any XDM on a step’s inputs, there will need to be clearly defined type coercion rules. In that case, adding any-XDM outputs to the mix would make sense, as far as I can see.

Romain.

On 19 févr. 2014, at 18:12, Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> Romain Deltour writes:
> 
>>> So, source on steps has an arbitrary XPath as value?  What about _its_
>>> value?  Is it restricted to documents?  If not, is it restricted at
>>> all?
>> 
>> The idea would be to allow arbitrary XPath ('item()*'), yes. Some
>> type coercion would be needed at some places, e.g. to serialize an
>> XPath or when an actual document node is expected.
> 
> What about step outputs?
> 
> ht
> -- 
>       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
>      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
>                Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
>                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
> [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 17:25:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:41:12 UTC