Re: Minutes for XProc WG telcon of 6 Apr 2006

Ok I understand now
But I can't stand we can't use constants like the dummy true() or false()
which are simple xpath without reference to a document

I imagine we have to reformulate so to understand
<<
Conditionals are based on XPath expressions. It is possible to refer to a
main Document as context
Nota : we can still use document() function available in XPath for reference
to more than one document
>>

Mohamed

On 4/10/06, Rui Lopes <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt> wrote:
>
> I was talking about testing over pipeline parameters without having to
> test xpaths against documents. Example:
>
> <p:pipeline>
>    <p:param name="debug" value="false" />
>
>    <p:step name="xslt">
>      ...
>    </p:step>
>    <p:if test="true($debug)">
>      <!-- perform some debugging tasks -->
>    </p:if>
>    ...
> </p:pipeline>
>
>
> If this type of features isn't allowed in the pipeline language, we
> would have to define the debug flag in a dummy document and afterwards
> test that document with a xpath expression.
>
> Cheers,
> Rui
>
>
> Innovimax SARL wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > I'm not sure to understand all your resquest but imagine it is a
> > XSLT-like parameter style
> > Then a parameter is just a xsl:variable-like so can be accessed via
> XPath
> > That's another point for XPath to be intimately related to XProc
> >
> > Mohamed
> >
> >
> > On 4/10/06, *Rui Lopes* <rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt <mailto:rlopes@di.fc.ul.pt>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >      >
> >      >   Conditionals and sub-pipelines
> >      >
> >      >    Norm: Richard proposed a single standard conditional that
> >     takes a document
> >      >    and an XPath, is that enough?
> >      >
> >      >    Norm wonders if the WG thinks that's all we need
> >      >
> >      >    Henry: If you need something really complicated, you can write
> an
> >      >    arbitrarily complicated computation that produces a document.
> >      >    ... And then switch on that conditional.
> >      >
> >      >    Proposal: The pipeline conditional component is XPath
> >     expression over
> >      >    document. If you need more, build a document and use that?
> >      >
> >      >    Accepted.
> >
> >
> >     I've been thinking a bit more about this issue. On the assumption
> that
> >     we allow specifying pipeline parameters (like step/component
> parameters
> >     - which I would like to have in the language), shouldn't we allow
> >     conditionals over these parameters? I wouldn't like to have to
> produce a
> >     document for activating a simple debug flag inside an XProc-based
> >     application, for instance.
> >
> >
> >     Rui
>

--
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 8 72 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 
------=_Part_73_18014443.1144665673141--

Received on Tuesday, 11 April 2006 09:46:54 UTC