Re: Types for Option Values

On 5/23/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> / Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> was heard to say:
> | We definitely need to pass namespaces in to the step
>
> Actually, I think you have to keep the namespace context that's
> associated no only with the step, but also with each of it's p:option
> and p:parameter elements. Users probably aren't actually going to change
> the namespace bindings between p:option elements, but there's nothing to
> stop them.

We can
If we say that the namespaces defined at the
option/parameter/input/output level are put together, and in case of
duplicate, there is an error !

>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The delivering of knowledge in distinct
> http://nwalsh.com/            | and disjointed aphorisms doth leave the
>                               | wit of man more free to turn and toss,
>                               | and to make use of that which is so
>                               | delivered to more several purposes and
>                               | applications.--Sir Francis Bacon
>
>


-- 
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 Wednesday, 23 May 2007 13:05:40 UTC