New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

What should we do about subpipelines that end with a variable? #693

Closed
ndw opened this Issue Jan 6, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Jan 6, 2019

Consider

<p:group>
  <p:identity/>
  <p:variable name="irrelevant" select="count(//*)"/>
</p:group>

Variables aren't steps, so the last step of this subpipeline is p:identity so the output of the p:identity step is the output of the p:group (on an anonymous port because it wasn't named).

This is fine, I suppose. The output of the identity step will be consumed by both the group and the variable. That's not a problem, per se. It looks a little weird though.

We could forbid this, but that would require adding (a little more) complexity to the spec. And it's not something anyone is likely to do.

I propose that we add this to the test suite so that we can be sure processors do the right thing but otherwise ignore it.

Thoughts or objections?

@xml-project

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

xml-project commented Jan 6, 2019

I propose that we add this to the test suite so that we can be sure processors do the right thing but otherwise ignore it.

+1

@ndw

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Jan 6, 2019

Great. I created an issue for this in the test repo, xproc/3.0-test-suite#120 , to track it. I'm closing this one.

@ndw ndw closed this Jan 6, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment