Re: non-matched output port

On 4/30/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
>
> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
> | For
> |
> | Head (p:head)
> | Matching Documents (p:subsequence)
> | Tail (p:tail)
> |
> | I propose to add "dual port" or "non matched" output port which will
> | output the rest in a sequence
>
> I suppose the incremental cost is small. What do others think?
>
> | The same for
> |
> | Delete (p:delete)
> | Replace (p:replace)
> |
> | it would generate a sequence of the node deleted or replaced in a
> sequence
>
> I don't understand what you mean for these two. Consider:
>
> <p:delete>
>   <p:input port="source">
>     <p:inline>
>       <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
>         <head>
>           <title>Test</title>
>           <script language="Javascript">
>             /* Nothing really here */
>           </script>
>         </head>
>         <body>
>           <h1>Test</h1>
>           <p>This is a test. This is only a test. Had this
>           been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror
>           and you would not have been informed.</p>
>         </body>
>       </html>
>     </p:inline>
>   </p:input>
>   <p:option name="target" value="h:script"
>             xmlns:h="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"/>
> </p:delete>
>
> What would be produced on the other port? A document consisting
> of a single h:script element?
>
> What would the processor do if the delete expression selected only a
> text node or something else that can't be an XML document?



You're absolutely right for p:delete, but what about p:replace ?

Mohamed


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 8 72 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €

Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 21:36:47 UTC