- 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