Revision [152]
Last edited on 2011-07-27 05:31:51 by DavidLeeAdditions:
=====A format for use in XML Pipeline Processors so that steps can be implemented by different vendors or in different languages.=====
Since there is no standardized format for representing 'sequence of documents' (which is a subset of XDM) as well as XDM in general, implementations of XProc must decide on proprietary formats for these. The result is that there is neither a common format for inputting or outputting data or for how the data is formatted between steps. This means that there is no vendor compatibility for either using pipeline processes or for implementing steps in pipeline processors.
If a developer or user wishes to integrate with XProc (or other XML pipeline processor) since there is no common way of supplying input or consuming output then each vendors implementation must be integrated differently.
Developers of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step need to be able to consume and produce XDM types (or a subset of XDM Types). If these are represented in a common format then step developers could produce steps which work in multiple implementations of Pipeline processors.
Since there is no standardized format for representing 'sequence of documents' (which is a subset of XDM) as well as XDM in general, implementations of XProc must decide on proprietary formats for these. The result is that there is neither a common format for inputting or outputting data or for how the data is formatted between steps. This means that there is no vendor compatibility for either using pipeline processes or for implementing steps in pipeline processors.
If a developer or user wishes to integrate with XProc (or other XML pipeline processor) since there is no common way of supplying input or consuming output then each vendors implementation must be integrated differently.
Developers of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step need to be able to consume and produce XDM types (or a subset of XDM Types). If these are represented in a common format then step developers could produce steps which work in multiple implementations of Pipeline processors.
Deletions:
Since there is no standardized format for representing 'sequence of documents' (which is a subset of XDM) as well as XDM in general, implementations of XProc must decide on proprietary formats for these. The result is that there is neither a standard format for inputting or outputting data or for how the data is formatted between steps. This means that there is no vendor compatibility for either using pipeline processes or for implementing steps in pipeline processors.
If a developer or user wishes to integrate with XProc (or other XML pipeline processor) since there is no standard way of supplying input or consuming output then each vendors implementation must be integrated differently.
Developers of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step need to be able to consume and produce XDM types (or a subset of XDM Types). If these are represented in a standard format then step developers could produce steps which work in multiple implementations of Pipeline processors.
Revision [74]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:32:17 by DavidLeeNo differences.
Revision [73]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:32:08 by DavidLeeAdditions:
==XML Pipeline Processor: ==
==XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step==
Developers of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step need to be able to consume and produce XDM types (or a subset of XDM Types). If these are represented in a standard format then step developers could produce steps which work in multiple implementations of Pipeline processors.
For example a producer of 'Validate with Schematron' should be able to write an XProc step that is usable within multiple vendors' XProc pipeline implementations.
A developer of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step should be able to write the step using non proprietary interfaces so they can be reused in multiple vendors implementations of the XML Pipeline Processor.
==XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step==
Developers of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step need to be able to consume and produce XDM types (or a subset of XDM Types). If these are represented in a standard format then step developers could produce steps which work in multiple implementations of Pipeline processors.
For example a producer of 'Validate with Schematron' should be able to write an XProc step that is usable within multiple vendors' XProc pipeline implementations.
A developer of an XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step should be able to write the step using non proprietary interfaces so they can be reused in multiple vendors implementations of the XML Pipeline Processor.
Deletions:
XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step
Revision [72]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:20:57 by DavidLeeAdditions:
Note that integrating *to* an XML Pipeline processor is equivilent to [[XDMSerializeUseCase1 Use Case 1]] and [[XDMSerializeUseCase2 Use Case 2]] so this use case is specific to implementing and integrating "steps" within a pipeline processor.
XML Pipeline Processor:
An XML Pipeline Processor coordinates an XML Transformation between "Steps". Each step can have XDM values (or a subset of XDM Values) input and output from that step.
XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step
XML Pipeline Processor:
An XML Pipeline Processor coordinates an XML Transformation between "Steps". Each step can have XDM values (or a subset of XDM Values) input and output from that step.
XML Pipeline Processor Extension Step
Deletions:
Revision [71]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:18:30 by DavidLeeAdditions:
Note that integrating *to* an XML Pipeline processor is equivilent to [[XDMSerializeUseCase1 Use Case 1]] and [[XDMSerializeUseCase2 Use Case 2]]
Deletions:
Revision [70]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:17:48 by DavidLeeAdditions:
Note that integrating *to* an XML Pipeline processor is equivilent to [[XDMSerializeUseCase6 Use Case 6]]
Revision [69]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:15:52 by DavidLeeAdditions:
XML Pipeline Processors such as [[http://xproc.org/ XProc]] and [[http://www.xmlsh.org xmlsh]] pass XDM values between 'steps' in the pipeline. XProc, for example, passes 'sequence of documents' between steps, as well as input and output to the XProc pipeline as a whole.
Since there is no standardized format for representing 'sequence of documents' (which is a subset of XDM) as well as XDM in general, implementations of XProc must decide on proprietary formats for these. The result is that there is neither a standard format for inputting or outputting data or for how the data is formatted between steps. This means that there is no vendor compatibility for either using pipeline processes or for implementing steps in pipeline processors.
If a vendor wishes to implement an extension step (or even a be used for a predefined step) for an XProc or other pipeline processor they need to implement vendor specific interfaces in order to be integrated into the pipeline processor.
If a developer or user wishes to integrate with XProc (or other XML pipeline processor) since there is no standard way of supplying input or consuming output then each vendors implementation must be integrated differently.
Since there is no standardized format for representing 'sequence of documents' (which is a subset of XDM) as well as XDM in general, implementations of XProc must decide on proprietary formats for these. The result is that there is neither a standard format for inputting or outputting data or for how the data is formatted between steps. This means that there is no vendor compatibility for either using pipeline processes or for implementing steps in pipeline processors.
If a vendor wishes to implement an extension step (or even a be used for a predefined step) for an XProc or other pipeline processor they need to implement vendor specific interfaces in order to be integrated into the pipeline processor.
If a developer or user wishes to integrate with XProc (or other XML pipeline processor) since there is no standard way of supplying input or consuming output then each vendors implementation must be integrated differently.
Deletions:
Revision [68]
Edited on 2009-09-18 13:08:32 by DavidLeeAdditions:
=====Standardization of a format for use in XML Pipeline Processors so that steps can be implemented by different vendors or in different languages.=====
XML Pipeline Processors such as [[http://xproc.org/ XProc]] and [[http://www.xmlsh.org xmlsh]] pass XDM values between 'steps' in the pipeline. XProc, for example, passes 'sequence of documents' between steps.
XML Pipeline Processors such as [[http://xproc.org/ XProc]] and [[http://www.xmlsh.org xmlsh]] pass XDM values between 'steps' in the pipeline. XProc, for example, passes 'sequence of documents' between steps.
Deletions:
XDM Producers have no standard way of storing results. In particular, test cases and standards have no consistant way of publishing expected results.
It is desirable that XDM Producers be able to produce XDM results in a format which is comparable to XDM Standards.
Example, the XQuery standard may state the result of an operation is a particular XDM dataum. This should be able to be published as a canonical text format so that comparison with XQuery implementations can be validated against the expected output.
Different XQuery implementations should be able to produce the same canonical format so they may be compared to each other as well as the standards documentation.
By having a concrete canonical format implementations and standards can be compared objectively and automatically and not be left to interpretation of authors to determine if a in-memory format corresponds to the correct result.
XDM Producers. XQuery programs which produces XDM values.
XDM Standards. A standard which describes the expected result of XDM Producers.
It is expected that the production of XDM Producers be able to be compared to both other XDM Producers and to XDM Standards so that the validity of operations is discernible and provable.
