- From: Romain Deltour <rdeltour@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:51:03 +0100
- To: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Cc: "Geert J." <geert.josten@dayon.nl>, Jostein Austvik Jacobsen <josteinaj@gmail.com>, XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
> Thank you for making me realize that I wasted time on this one :-) Had you listen to me instead of drinking your beer… I told you in Prague :P > At first glance, I like the definition of the > language, but I think it lacks examples. As an example, what would be > for example the equivalent in XProcSpec of [1] ? You can have a look at some examples there: https://github.com/daisy-consortium/xprocspec/tree/master/xprocspec/src/test/xprocspec/tests Personally I’m not fluent in XProcSpec yet, so I’ll let Jostein chime in if he wants. > How is it implemented? Is it platform-independent? Like > implemented with XProc only? Yes, it’s based on XProc and XSLT. > Do you know if anything exists to generate API documentation based > on a p:library and its p:documentation elements? (at least for step > declarations) There’s XProcDoc: https://github.com/vojtechtoman/xprocdoc Jostein also worked on a DITA-based approach at some point, but which was never really finalized IIRC. But for a new project I would consider using something based on lightweight markup (AsciiDoc, Markdown), which is far easier to write for documentation than any HTML or custom XML. Romain. On 20 févr. 2014, at 15:33, Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org> wrote: > On 20 February 2014 09:01, Romain Deltour wrote: > >>> 4/ a unit test suite, for simple tests > >> Have you considered using XProcSpec ? >> http://daisy-consortium.github.io/xprocspec/ > > Thank you for making me realize that I wasted time on this one :-) > Actually I looked for it but could not find it again, so assumed it > was not public. At first glance, I like the definition of the > language, but I think it lacks examples. As an example, what would be > for example the equivalent in XProcSpec of [1] ? Basically it tests > the following: > > <pipx:parameter param-name="foo"> > <p:with-param name="foo" select="'bar'"/> > </pipx:parameter> > --> <param name="foo">bar</param> > > <pipx:parameter param-name="foo" required="true"> > <p:with-param name="foo" select="'bar'"/> > </pipx:parameter> > --> <param name="foo">bar</param> > > <pipx:parameter param-name="foo" required="true"> > <p:input port="parameters"> > <p:empty/> > </p:input> > </pipx:parameter> > --> error pipx:no-parameter > > How is it implemented? Is it platform-independent? Like > implemented with XProc only? > >>> 2/ to document precisely each step in the sources using >>> p:documentation >>> 3/ a simple documentation generation for the website (using >>> documentation from 2/) > > Do you know if anything exists to generate API documentation based > on a p:library and its p:documentation elements? (at least for step > declarations) > > Regards, > > -- > Florent Georges > http://fgeorges.org/ > http://h2oconsulting.be/ > > [1]https://github.com/fgeorges/pipx/blob/master/test/pipx-parameter.xml
Received on Thursday, 20 February 2014 14:51:34 UTC