RE: Conditional processing based on option

Hello,

Would p:filter work as an alternative to p:identity[p:with-input] here? I suppose I could try and see...

Regards, Wendell

-----Original Message-----
From: Norm Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> 
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2024 4:03 AM
To: denis.maier@unibe.ch
Cc: xproc-dev@w3.org
Subject: Re: Conditional processing based on option

> But, apparently this does not work as p:with-input is not allowed under p:when and p:otherwise.

You have to put the whole step in the when/otherwise branches.
This should work, though I haven’t tested it :-)

  <p:option name="sorted-files" select="'true'" />

  <p:choose>
    <p:when test="$sorted-files = 'false'">
      <p:identity>
        <p:with-input select="//*:file => sort((), function($file) { analyze-string  ($file!@name, '[0-9]+')!descendant::*[not(*)]!(if (.
                     instance of element(fn:match)) then number(.) else string(.)) })"/>
      </p:identity>
    </p:when>
    <p:otherwise>
      <p:identity>
        <p:with-input select="//*:file"/>
      </p:identity>
    </p:otherwise>
  </p:choose>

> Is there a way to make this work?

Martin showed another alternative, using a larger and more complex XPath expression. That will work too. I tend to think of XProc pipelines in terms of step composition, so I prefer to have more smaller steps rather than fewer steps with more complex XPath expressions. YMMV.

When I was first reading this thread, I thought, I wonder if we need a p:sort step. Fun challenge: can you implement a generalized sort step in XProc? You can certainly do it with p:run, but can you do it without p:run?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

--
Norm Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
https://norm.tovey-walsh.com/


> Everything is temporary.

Received on Friday, 22 November 2024 15:37:19 UTC