- From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:00:26 -0400
- To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
> From the examples above, I don't see if p:template would be a step or a > binding. (I expect it to be a step, but I don't see an input port.) > Personally, I think that making it a step would be more flexible because > you could then, for instance, use other steps to dynamically construct > the "template XML document" and then pass it to p:template. I actually think that adding a p:template-like step to the EXProc library would be a good idea for now. It would both fill in the gap in the functionality before XProc 1.1 comes out, and it would also give us more feeling/user experience for deciding what exactly we want in 1.1. Vojtech -- Vojtech Toman Consultant Software Engineer EMC | Information Intelligence Group vojtech.toman@emc.com http://developer.emc.com/xmltech
Received on Thursday, 12 August 2010 17:01:23 UTC