- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 11:53:09 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2007 18:53:38 UTC
On 5/15/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > > > | A tool vendor might want such a default file name but I don't see > | how we can say "make.xpd" is better than "build.xpd" or "process.xpd". > > For the record, this wasn't a spec question, it was just a casual > inquiry from an implementor. If those of us building command-line > implementations made the same decisions... Ah , OK. Currently, I force the user to give me a pipeline name. My command line looks like: xproc pipeline.xpd ( port=uri ... )* you can default the output port to stdout if there is only one unbound output port. You can also default one unbound input port to allow you to only specify a uri: xproc pipeline.xpd uri-of-xml-doc -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2007 18:53:38 UTC