Re: Naming ports vs. naming documents

Alex Milowski wrote:
> So, for example, chaining XSLT transforms together should have some
> defaults:
> 
> <step type='xslt'>
>    <input name="stylesheet" ref="..."/>
> </step>
> <step type='xslt'>
>    <input name="stylesheet" ref="..."/>
> </step>
> 
> Of course, the problem is, does that XSLT output one document or many?
> Does it take in one or many?
> 
> I think a useful default is that there *one* implicit input and *one*
> implicit output.  If that doesn't match the context in which the step
> is used, halt-and-catch-fire.

What if we have a step whose component has zero inputs or zero outputs, 
e.g.:

<step type="i-accept-zero-inputs" />
<step type="xslt">
   <input name="stylesheet" ref="..." />
</step>

It looks ambiguous to me. We could certainly delegate this type of 
semantics to each component, but afaik it wouldn't be good (specially 
for outter-spec components' semantics).

Cheers,
Rui