- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 20:05:22 +0100
- To: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Norman Walsh writes:
> Innovimax W3C <innovimax+w3c@gmail.com> writes:
>> Well... I don't think that we screwed up
>>
>> We were consistent in having step that take one document and let the
>> user manage himself the iteration (like the proposal you gave)
>
> Well, ok, but I think it's very inconsistent that p:identity accepts
> a sequence and p:filter doesn't. I'm just saying.
I recall that we made an exception for p:identity since it is needed
as a placeholder in certain circumstances where you may not know (yet)
whether a sequence is impending. . .
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFLwMvykjnJixAXWBoRAj2aAJ4rGF6EHMQUYCovrxy2gfGXG7FPHACfedyF
a7WtPE5wNOiaJ6iunIqjxuo=
=Fil/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Saturday, 10 April 2010 19:05:53 UTC