- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:25:53 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I _really_ don't want to use ->, it's just semantically wrong (the step doesn't _produce_ or _yield_ the port, the step scopes the port), as well as somehow crossing some microparsing boundary I don't want to cross. I'm not unhappy with !, but if people aren't, what about using . and requiring no . in step or port names? Or, if I can suppress my microparsing concerns, what about x[y] ? But, the longer this goes on, the harder I find it to repress my "Having trouble designing a micro-syntax? XML has the answer, it's called _markup_!" reflex response in this sort of situation. So why not <p:input port="document"> <pipe step="x" port="y"/> </p:input> possibly shortened to <p:input port="document" source="x" sourcePort="y"/> ht - -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, 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 really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE7HOBkjnJixAXWBoRAqFqAJ9Ei4WPwMsKHq9K2QrDC6O2xbds/QCfVMVe bRka5WKEws/Ww9gP5cd8XzY= =62op -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2006 15:26:21 UTC