Re: parameters and pipelines

Ok so, in that case, since the behaviour of p:input and p:input
kind="parameter" are different, I would argue to mandate the kind
attribute to notice visually the difference



On 7/6/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say:
> |> |    Steps can access the unnamed parameter set using defaulting:
> |> |
> |> |      <p:input name='bar' kind='parameter'/>
> |>
> |> That would be:
> |>
> |>       <p:input name='bar'/>
> |>
> |> I guess we could do this. That makes this exactly the same as not
> |> specifying any p:input for the parameter input at all, right?
> |
> | Hum... isn't this supposed to link to the default readable port ?
> | <p:input name='bar'/>
> |
> | nothing would be an error in that case ?
>
> I don't think it makes sense for parameter inputs to bind to the
> default readable port. That would almost certainly raise an error
> since it's unlikely that the default readable port will produce
> c:parameter or c:parameter-list documents.
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | A child becomes an adult when he
> http://nwalsh.com/            | realizes he has a right not only to be
>                               | right but also to be wrong.--Thomas
>                               | Szasz
>
>


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €

Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 16:54:57 UTC