- From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2006 18:13:24 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Jeni, On 7/27/06, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote: > > Given that there must be exactly one, is there a compelling reason to > > do this with a p:declare-input as opposed to simply allowing those > > attributes on the p:for-each element? > > I have five reasons: > > 1. For symmetry with <p:declare-output> in <p:for-each> > 2. To provide a place for the naming of the input, as opposed to the > loop itself > 3. For symmetry with <p:declare-input> in <p:choose> (if we have them) > 4. For symmetry with <p:declare-input> for other inputs in <p:for-each> > (if we have them) > 5. For extensibility should we choose (in some future version) to allow > multiple inputs over which we iterate I can be convinced both ways on the issue of having an additional element for the input of the <p:for-each> vs. adding attributes on the <p:for-each> itself. Your arguments are convincing, but I can see someone else arguing convincingly enough the other way. I think I will be fine both ways. Alex -- Blog (XML, Web apps, Open Source): http://www.orbeon.com/blog/
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 01:13:29 UTC