- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 15:05:37 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
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