- From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:13:16 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
A couple of comments: 2.9 Parameters I read: Additionally, if a p:pipeline or p:declare-step does not declare any parameter input ports, but contains a step which has an unbound primary parameter input port, then an implicit primary parameter input port (named “parameters”) will be added to the pipeline. (If the pipeline declares another (non-parameter) port named “parameters”, the implicit primary parameter input port will be named “parameters1”. If that's not available, then “parameters2”, etc. until an available name is found.) Sorry if I missed the discussion about this, but I fail to see why we need to adopt a defaulting strategy for parameter inputs that is different than the one we have for document inputs. Adopting the same strategy would also avoid having those implicit names "parameters", "parameters1", ... created. 5.1.1 Document Inputs I read: The kind attribute distinguishes between the two kinds of inputs: document inputs and parameter inputs. An input port is a document input port if kind is specified with the value “document” or if kind is not specified. Shouldn't we also say there what the value of "kind" should be to specify that this is a parameter input? (i.e. parameter) Alex -- Orbeon Forms - Web 2.0 Forms, open-source, for the Enterprise Orbeon's Blog: http://www.orbeon.com/blog/ Personal Blog: http://avernet.blogspot.com/
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2008 01:13:53 UTC