W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > November 2010

RE: How to run unconnected steps in sequence?

From: <vojtech.toman@emc.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:25:23 -0400
Message-ID: <997C307BEB90984EBE935699389EC41C029E15DF@CORPUSMX70C.corp.emc.com>
To: <xproc-dev@w3.org>
The solution is to introduce the dependency explicitly. Here are some examples (all are variations on the same theme, but some may be more applicable to your use case):



<p:store href=”file.xml” name=”store”/>


  <p:with-option name=”href” select=”’file.xml’”>

    <p:pipe step=”store” port=”result”/>





<p:store href=”file.xml” name=”store”/>



    <p:input port=”source”>

      <p:pipe step=”store” port=”result”/>



  <p:load href=”file.xml”/>





  <p:store href=”file.xml”/>


    <p:input port="source">







  <p:load href=”file.xml”/>



Some processors also support extension attributes to control dependencies between steps, but I would recommend to avoid this unless absolutely necessary.






Vojtech Toman

Consultant Software Engineer

EMC | Information Intelligence Group




From: xproc-dev-request@w3.org [mailto:xproc-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jostein Austvik Jacobsen
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 1:01 PM
To: xproc-dev@w3.org
Subject: How to run unconnected steps in sequence?


I remember seeing a note on this problem somewhere, but I can't find it. Say I want to run these two steps in sequence:


<p:store href="file.xml"/>

<p:load href="file.xml"/>


p:load would have to run after p:store, or the file wouldn't be there yet. Since p:store has no primary output and p:load has no primary input, the processor may choose the order they are run in.


Is there a standard pattern for solving such issues? Something general, not just for the store/load use-case?




Jostein Austvik Jacobsen

Received on Monday, 1 November 2010 12:27:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:07 UTC