- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 16:01:52 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
+1 for p:empty | (p:document | p:inline | p:port)+ I always feel like <p:input port="foo"/> is a form of defaulting where we recall the name but let it point to default Mohamed On 5/23/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > / Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say: > |> > |> <p:input port="source"><p:inline/></p:input> > |> > | > | I would say no, since we don't have a (namespace) well formed document > | in the p:inline element > | > | Am I missing something ? > > No, you're right, it's not valid today. I was thinking that an empty > inline would bind to an empty sequence, but it doesn't. > > Maybe Jeni's right and > > <p:input port="source"/> > > ought to bind to an empty sequence. > > Or maybe we need a <p:empty/> alternative to inline|document|port > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Convictions are more dangerous enemies > http://nwalsh.com/ | of truth than lies.-- Nietzsche > > -- 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 14:02:13 UTC