- From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:16:47 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
On 5/8/06, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote: > I agree completely. On the telcons, we've been refering to them as > stdin and stdout because (a) many of us have a *nix background and (b) > it does avoid phrases like "I think the input input should..." ;-) > > When it comes time to give them real names, I think "input" and "output" > are a lot more friendly. Norm/Jeni, Maybe another way to look at it is that components can have 0 to n *named* inputs, 0 to n *named* outputs, an optional *anonymous* input, and an optional *anonymous* output. Those optional input/output would really be anonymous. <p:input ref="..."/> would not be shortcut for for <p:input name="stdin" ref="..."/> or <p:input name="input" ref="..."/>. Alex -- Blog (XML, Web apps, Open Source): http://www.orbeon.com/blog/
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2006 07:16:57 UTC