RE: calling for xproc pain points, requested features, etc

Nice idea! #current doesn't make much sense, but perhaps something like
#previous would?

Kind regards,
Geert

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Philip Fennell [mailto:Philip.Fennell@marklogic.com]
Verzonden: donderdag 5 januari 2012 15:58
Aan: James Fuller; XProc Dev
Onderwerp: RE: calling for xproc pain points, requested features, etc

My favourite gripe is that you have to explicitly name a step in order to
refer to any of its inputs from a p:pipe instruction within that step.

Would it be possible to have the concept of #current or #parent as the
reference to the step declaration you are in. This would be similar to
XSLT 2's #current mode.

I think it would go something like this:


	<p:declare-step type="some:step">
		<p:input port="source" primary="true"/>
		<p:input port="other" primary="false"/>
		<p:output port="result"/>
		
		<p:add-attribute match="c:request" attribute-name="href">
			<p:with-option name="attribute-value"
select="/html:link/@href">
				<p:pipe port="other" step="#parent"/>
			</p:with-option>
		</p:add-attribute>
	</p:declare-step>


Probably #current is not a good name because in the above example the
'current' step is p:add-attribute but its 'parent' step is the some:step
declaration.


Regards

Philip



-----Original Message-----
From: James Fuller [mailto:james.fuller.2007@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 1:22 PM
To: XProc Dev
Subject: calling for xproc pain points, requested features, etc

As we review where we go from here with xproc.vnext can I ask people
on this list to comment on;

* highlight their top 4-5 pain points using XProc from a usability
perspective. We have captured some of these here;

     http://www.w3.org/wiki/Usability

* expand on what you think maybe useful for xproc.vnext, once again we
have captured some of this here

    http://www.w3.org/wiki/XprocVnext

* comment on expectations for timelines on an xproc.vnext as well as
highlighting key priorities e.g. is this is a short 'fix whats broke'
or something more 'revolutionary' ?

appreciate everyone taking time and effort on this.

Jim Fuller

Received on Thursday, 5 January 2012 15:09:32 UTC