- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:35:01 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Rui Lopes wrote: > If this pipeline was written in a direct syntax, my pipeline processor > would have to know that an hypothetical <my:safeguard /> tag would > represent a step. However, if it doesn't recognize it, well... my cpu > would certainly melt! That wouldn't happen in a generic syntax. I don't think changing <my:safeguard/> to <p:step type="my:safeguard"/> is going to keep your CPU from melting. The pipeline processor has to know what my:safeguard means in either case. As such, the burden is the same. I think the main issue comes down to whether you can validate the syntax with one schema or not and whether it actually makes things easier for the pipeline author. --Alex Milowski
Received on Friday, 30 June 2006 17:01:55 UTC