- From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:04:06 -0400
- To: <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
> Except that the spec says of p:inline: > > Inline documents are considered “quoted”. The pipeline processor > passes them literally to the port, even if they contain elements > from the XProc namespace or other namespaces that would have other > semantics outside of the p:inline. > > Hence my suggestion with the ugly name p:interpolated-inline. My (XProc 1.0-based) understanding was that you would simply pass the template to p:template using p:inline (that is, "quoted") or any other binding and the step itself would then do the template processing based on some well-defined logic. If I were to implement p:template using XProc 1.0, I think I would do something like this: <p:declare-step type="p:template"> <p:input port="source" primary="true"/> <p:input port="template"/> <p:input port="parameters" kind="parameter"/> <p:output port="result"/> <p:option name="match" required="true"/> </p:declare-step> - The "source" input port contains the document that you want to apply the template to (perhaps it could be sequence="true" to allow 0 documents?) - The "template" input port contains the template document - The "parameters" parameter input port contains variable bindings that you can refer to in your template - The "match" option is used for selecting nodes that you want to transform in the input document - The "output" port contains the transformed document Now, the annoying part (in my view) is the need to use a parameter port for passing in the variable/option bindings. So in XProc 1.1 we could say that inside p:template, all in-scope variable/option bindings are visible. Regards, Vojtech -- Vojtech Toman Consultant Software Engineer EMC | Information Intelligence Group vojtech.toman@emc.com http://developer.emc.com/xmltech
Received on Friday, 13 August 2010 17:05:03 UTC