- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 15:51:27 -0400
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <m2ab4ztzgg.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes: > 2009/5/26 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>: >> Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes: >>>> The idea is that the manifest says what to do. The step takes the >>>> documents identified by the @href's in the manifest and puts them in >>>> the zip file with the names specified by the @name's. >>> >>> -1, but only if you are considering the idea of XSLT style variables? >>> Using indirection via a manifest I lose the ability to list out the >>> files using variables which the implementation has resolved? >>> How to get dir/dir/*.xml ? > >>From which I gather you don't support the idea > of using variables as per XSLT? > > A manifest would kill it altogether. Expressing the manifest as an XML document doesn't prevent indirection. The question is, what's the best way to provide that indirection. > So no indirection in xproc? If by "indirection" you mean the ability to compute the manifest at runtime, using either variables/parameters or a list of the current files on disk, then you can absolutely use indirection. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Every vice you destroy has a http://nwalsh.com/ | corresponding virtue, which perishes | along with it.--Anatole France
Received on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 19:52:07 UTC