- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:04:02 +0100
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Norman Walsh wrote: > / Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say: > | Yes, I think both options and parameters should be scoped lexically and can be > | shadowed. I don't think either should be automatically passed in to steps: you > | need to use <p:option>, <p:parameter> or <p:import-parameter> to pass them in. > > It seems to me that parameters ought to pass down automatically. If I > have an XSLT step down inside a p:for-each, I'd like to be able to refer > to parameters I specified on the command line, even if I didn't mention > them on the p:for-each. Perhaps I used the term incorrectly, but that's precisely what I meant by lexical scoping. > | I think it would be very helpful to have a way of coercing parameters from one > | namespace to another: perhaps using a ns attribute on <p:import-parameter>. > > Hmm. So > > <p:import-parameter name="config:*" ns=""/> > > imports all the "config:*" parameters but moves them all to no-namespace? Yes, precisely. Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2007 16:04:11 UTC