Re: New "New" draft: 22 Aug 2007

/ Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
| On 8/29/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
|> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
|> | Example 3 is not a valid xproc instance : no primary input defined
|>
|> It gets one by default per our new rules.
|
| ?? The p:choose ??

Ack. Right. Test cases, we need test cases.

So, I *think* that it's sufficient to add an explicit p:input on the
p:pipeline. Then choose gets that as it's default readable port and
each when will, by default, bind its unbound inputs to the default
readable port. Right?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | We have fewer friends than we imagine,
http://nwalsh.com/            | but more than we know.--Hugo Von
                              | Hofmannsthal