- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:51:53 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <87ps27gsme.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Revised slightly:
Vasil Rangelov proposes[1] an atomic step to read a directory listing
and return it as a document. Jeni and I chatted about it a bit and it
seems like a good idea. Here's my (slightly revised) proposal:
<p:declare-step type="p:directory-list">
<p:output port="result"/>
<p:option name="path" value="."/>
<p:option name="recursive" value="no"/>
<p:option name="filter"/>
</p:declare-step>
The p:directory-list step reads all of the files in the specified
directory and returns a c:folder element:
<c:directory path="abs-path-specified">
<c:directory path="abs-path-specified/dirname"/>
<c:file path="abs-path-specified/filename"/>
...
</c:directory>
If the "recursive" option is "yes", then you get the whole, recursive
listing:
<c:directory path="abs-path-specified">
<c:directory path="abs-path-specified/dirname">
<c:file path="abs-path-specified/dirname/othername"/>
...
</c:directory>
<c:file name="abs-path-specified/filename"/>
...
</c:directory>
The significant change here is that the path names are returned as
fully qualified paths. The path originally specified is made absolute
before returning it.
The "filter" option specifies a command-line style pattern. So
<p:directory-list path="." recursive="yes" filter="*.xml">
returns only the files that match "*.xml" in the current directory
or any directory under the current directory.
There are a few different ways that we could go on the whole
recursive/filter business. I suggest that filters only apply to the
names of files, not directories.
The order of c:file and c:directory elements within a directory is
implementation defined. The current working directory is
implementation defined.
I don't know exactly what to point to for the syntax for filters. We
could use regexp, but that seems like overkill (and filenames often
contain periods so it's tedious for users). I cribbed the following
text from the csh manpage (and massaged it to fit this context):
The filter is regarded as a pattern and treats the characters
'*', '?', and '[' specially. If a filter is specified, only files
which have names that match the filter pattern are returned.
For the purpose of determining whether a filename matches or not,
only the filename part (and not any of the path components of
its absolute name) is considered.
In matching filenames, the character '*' matches any string of
characters, including the null string. The character '?' matches
any single character. The sequence [...] matches any one of the
characters enclosed. Within [...], a pair of characters separated
by '-' matches any character lexically between the two in Unicode
codepoint order (inclusive). All other characters match exactly
the same character.
Implementations can throw a dynamic error if the requested path is not
available to the user running the pipeline. The set of paths that are
available is implementation-defined. In environments where security is
paramount, there may be no accessible paths.
I propose that this be a required step.
Be seeing you,
norm
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2007Jul/0002.html
--
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Everything should be made as simple as
http://nwalsh.com/ | possible, but no simpler.
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2007 15:52:07 UTC