RE: (again) make defining connections easier

> We need to provide an addressing schema which clearly shows that this is
> not xpath ... but its difficult. I have assembled a few thoughts below;
> * not-matched@mystep seems ok but unsure about the usage of 2 ncnames
> as localpart@(FQ)DN ... I like it
> * otherwise the alternatives are slippery slope
>       * avoid dot style, eg. clashes with our default step naming !1.1.1
>       * avoid colon and usage w/ 2 ncnames, clashes with definition of qualified
> name
>       * xml:id (idrefs) ... #mystep:not-matched has its merits, but unattractive
>       * xlink equally unattractive

Sorry if this has been suggested (and rejected) before, but what about a 'fragment-identifier'-like scheme:


The step-name part is always unique within the current context, and the same applies to the port-name 'fragment': port names are unique in the scope of a step.

Maybe, but just maybe, we could go even further and interpret the value of the @pipe attribute as an URI, which would allow us to point to external resources without having to use p:document. 

(Also, but that's probably just my problem, for reasons I cannot quite explain I feel uncomfortable with the reversed port@step syntax.)


Received on Wednesday, 3 December 2014 12:54:40 UTC