- From: <Toman_Vojtech@emc.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:51:13 -0400
- To: <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Hi all, I have a question about manufacturing implicit output ports in compound steps. Section 2.3 of the spec says: "Additionally, if a compound step has no declared outputs and the last step in its subpipeline has an unbound primary output, then an implicit primary output port will be added to the compound step (and consequently the last step's primary output will be bound to it). This implicit output port has no name. It inherits the sequence property of the port bound to it." Does this apply also to p:declare-step? I just found out (to my surprise) that in our implementation, it does. The effect is that if you run the following pipeline: <p:declare-step> <p:load href="doc.xml"/> </p:declare-step> then our processor will manufacture an implicit primary output port for the pipeline, and you will get the contents of doc.xml as the pipeline result. Is this correct, or a bug in our implementation? Regards, Vojtech
Received on Monday, 22 June 2009 08:51:58 UTC