

Re: XProc Minutes 26 July 2007

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:44:44 -0400
Message-ID: <87y7h1hhbn.fsf@nwalsh.com>
|>       5. Proposal to add a version attribute to p:pipeline 
|            [our guess is the reference to p:pipe? was a typo]
| Alex says we should also have it on p:pipeline-library
| and make it required.  (At first) Mohamed agrees. 
| Richard prefers it be optional.

I don't think that's very useful. Making it optional only works until
such time as the next version comes out. So let's get users in the
habit of putting it in.

| Alex says that it should only be required on the
| document element (either p:pipeline or p:pipeline-library).
| Then Mohamed says he doesn't think we need version on
| p:pipeline-library, but instead it should just be on
| the p:pipeline's within the p:pipeline-library.
| Alex says we need to know what version of declare-step
| within a pipeline-library, so we do need the version
| on pipeline-library.
| Richard says we can resolve the issues of a mixed 
| version library in V2.

Well, maybe. As long as we aren't painting ourselves into any corners.
I'd prefer to require it on the document root (p:pipeline-library or
p:pipeline) and allow it on p:pipeline's nested inside
p:pipeline-library with the default semantic that they're whatever
their library is)

| We leaned toward adding a version attribute to 
| p:pipeline and p:pipeline-library and make it required
| (and maybe only allow it?) when the 
| p:pipeline|p:pipeline-library element is the document
| element.
| ACTION to Norm:  Consider the above discussion about
| when to have a version attribute and see if he can
| develop some specific wording.

Can do.

| Currently, we also have xproc-error and xproc-step
| namespaces right now.  Alex wondered why we need
| xproc-error.

Maybe not. Maybe the error messages could be in the xproc-step

                                        Be seeing you,


Received on Friday, 27 July 2007 17:44:57 UTC
