- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 13:28:20 +0100
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Hi, I was quite enamoured of naming steps and using some syntax to refer to the particular output port, as in: > <p:step name="p:load" xml:id="load-style"> > <p:input href="style.xsl"/> > </p:step> > > <p:step name="p:load" xml:id="load-doc"> > <p:input href="document.xml"/> > </p:step> > > <p:step name="p:xslt10" xml:id="style"> > <p:input ref="#load-doc/stdout"/> > <p:input name="style" ref="#load-style/stdout"/> > </p:step> However, I think I've decided against it. It struck me that most components are only going to have one output port anyway, so naming the steps doesn't really ease the burden on users to make up names. Also it places a burden on us to come up with a syntax for naming output ports, when users could easily use their own if they wished. A more convoluted reason is that labelling output ports provides a reason for the <p:output> element. If the output ports are labelled via the step, we have a situation where many most <p:output> elements would be essentially meaningless (in that they would convey no extra information about the pipeline). I dislike having syntax that users are forced to include simply to expose the inner workings of the pipeline, but omitting the <p:output> (as Norm did in the above example) makes it look as though the step has no output. I think the pipeline ends up being easier to understand if the outputs are explicitly labelled. So I prefer: > <p:step name="p:load"> > <p:input href="style.xsl"/> > <p:output label="style"/> > </p:step> > > <p:step name="p:load"> > <p:input href="document.xml"/> > <p:output label="doc"/> > </p:step> > > <p:step name="p:xslt10"> > <p:input ref="doc"/> > <p:input name="style" ref="style"/> > <p:output label="styled"/> > </p:step> On the other hand, if there were a reason to name steps for other purposes (e.g. to refer to them when indicating out-of-band dependencies between steps) then I might change my mind again. :) Cheers, Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Wednesday, 10 May 2006 12:28:26 UTC