- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:37:41 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2lkar7k8q.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Richard Tobin <richard@inf.ed.ac.uk> was heard to say: | Section 3.2: | | The scope of the names of the step types is the union of all the | pipelines and pipeline libraries available directly or via p:import. | | So there is exactly one scope for all the step types in a pipeline run? | | For example, if a pipeline imports a library, and that library contains | a pipeline, and that pipeline contains declare-step, then those steps | are visible in the top-level pipeline? And in other pipelines imported | from it? No, I don't think that was intended. How about The scope of the names of step types is the pipeline in which they occur. The in-scope names come from types that are: * Built-in to XProc (e.g., p:pipeline, p:choose, etc.) * Declared with p:declare-step (e.g, p:xslt, p:xinclude, etc.) in the pipeline or in a p:pipeline-library imported into the pipeline. * Defined with p:pipeline imported directly or in a p:pipeline-library imported into the pipeline. * Or built-in as extensions by a particular processor. All the step types in a pipeline must have unique names: it is a static error (err:XS0036) if any step type name is built-in and/or declared or defined more than once in the same scope. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Well-being is attained by little and http://nwalsh.com/ | little, and nevertheless it is no | little thing itself.--Zen of Citium
Received on Thursday, 27 September 2007 23:38:00 UTC