- From: Olivier JEULIN <olivier.jeulin@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 17:50:11 +0100
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Sorry, I wanted to reply Jostein About the naming, instead of connecting in-memory.in to in-memory.out, you could name in/out ports "in-memory", and they would connect. 2014-02-19 17:33 GMT+01:00 Olivier JEULIN <olivier.jeulin@gmail.com>: > If I understood correctly, you want to automatically connect an > output named "A" to an input named "A"? > > Given that the spec v2 proposes in §2.7 > “Change all steps with a single non-primary output to have a single > primary output” > could we remove the notion of primary port, and say that, by default, > input ports connect to the first previous (preceding-sibling::*[1]) > port of the same name? > We can still define explicitly the binding when we need to connect to > another port or step. -- Envoyé depuis Firefox et analysé grâce à Hadoop par la NSA (via Gmail©®™) 😏
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 16:50:59 UTC