Re: Default pipeline?

I doubt Norm is thinking this is something that belongs in the XProc spec.

First off an implementation should recommend a suffix ...
Since xproc pipelines are xml they could be
     .xml

why not ?


But following the XSLT convention maybe
     .xpl
     .xproc
     .xpipeline

I think a lot of people are using .xpl but maybe an implementation 
should suggest something ?

Once you decide on the prefered implementation suffix ...
the "default pipeline" might be ...

     xproc.<suffix.>
     pipeline.<suffix>
     standard input ....
<implementation name>.<suffix>








-------------------------
David A. Lee
dlee@calldei.com
http://www.calldei.com
http://www.xmlsh.org


On 3/11/2010 9:30 AM, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Norman Walsh writes:
>
>    
>> If you run "make" without a make file, it looks for "Makefile".
>> If you run "ant" without a build file, it looks for "build.xml".
>>
>> If you run an XProc processor without specifying a pipeline, should it
>> look for a default pipeline. What should it be called?
>>      
> Maybe, but that's for implementations to document, not the spec. to
> require.
>
> I would expect to configure the specific name in the
> site-configuration for my pipeline processor, I guess.  That way it
> could be absolute or relative. . .
>
> ht
> - -- 
>         Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
>                           Half-time member of W3C Team
>        10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
>                  Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
>                         URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
> [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFLmP6akjnJixAXWBoRApK7AJ4l8vcjECyBmKU746I/0znUxw4mWwCfbPiu
> Ivn7LUijFXh2eIbLGrCQtAQ=
> =WkBc
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

Received on Thursday, 11 March 2010 15:22:21 UTC