- From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 10:23:06 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
On 4/27/06, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote: > I feel that my attempts to persuade the WG that there's value in > having components identified as being functional has so far failed and > I'm inclined to abandon it. Hearing the arguments presented so far, I see more drawbacks than benefits to both: (a) enforcing that components have no side-effects and (b) enforcing URI stability. So I concur with your conclusion. > Although it seems reasonable to me, I'd > like not to delay WG progress for it any further, if we can get > consensus to abandon it. I don't actually think that pipelines like 2 > above occur very often. And if they do, and if the user really wants > to make sure that p:foo is only executed once, it can be rewritten: > > <p:pipeline> > <p:output ref="foo1"/> > <p:output ref="foo2"/> > <p:step name="p:foo"> > <p:input href="foo.xml"/> > <p:output label="tee"/> > </p:step> > <p:step name="p:tee"> > [...] Again, I agree. And as a syntactic sugar, we can make the "tee" implicit when there are multiple references to the same label in the pipeline. Alex
Received on Thursday, 27 April 2006 17:23:23 UTC