cocoon-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Bruchez <>
Subject Re: XProc?
Date Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:47:27 GMT
The question was asked by Sylvain in the dev list back in December 2005, 
when the working group was being formed, and the unanimous response from 
Cocoon developers was quite dismissive:

As a participating member of the XML Processing Model Working Group (I 
wrote the W3C XPL Submission for Orbeon [1][2]) at W3C, I can't imagine 
something more puzzling. On the other hand, this sounds like a typical 
instance of the NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome.



Jeroen Reijn wrote:
> Hi Lars,
> this seems very interesting! I guess this does have to go to the developers list though.
> I did not find any reference or participation on the Developers list yet, so I don't
think the Cocoon community is participating yet.
> I personally think that the cocoon community should participate in the XML Processing
Model Working Group, since they have a LOT of experience with XML processing and pipeline
> Regards,
> Reijn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars Huttar []
> Posted At: Friday, September 29, 2006 8:33 PM
> Posted To: Cocoon User List
> Conversation: XProc?
> Subject: XProc?
> Hello Cocooners,
> Maybe this is a question for the dev list but...
> given the announcement below, that W3C is working on a standard for an XML pipeline language
"to specify the order, parameters, and expected results of transformations in a standard way",
is this something that is likely to make its way into Cocoon?
> Should Cocoon support XProc?
> Is the Cocoon community contributing to this standardization effort based on our experience
with XML pipelining?
> Lars
> (From: XML Daily Newslink. Friday, 29 September 2006
> A Cover Pages Publication
> Provided by OASIS
> Edited by Robin Cover)
> W3C Introduces XProc: An XML Pipeline Language
> Norman Walsh (ed), W3C Working Draft
> W3C has announced the publication of a First Public Working Draft for
> "XProc: An XML Pipeline Language." The draft was produced my members of
> the XML Processing Model Working Group as part of the W3C XML Activity.
> That working group was chartered to address a range concerns that are
> not formally defined in the XML Recommendation itself, for example,
> ability to specify the order, parameters, and expected results of
> transformations in a standard way. XSLT, XML Schema, XInclude, XML
> Canonicalization, and other specifications do define transformations
> that operate on and produce XML documents. However, the order in which
> these transformations are to be applied is not specified anywhere,
> even though applying them in different orders will in general yield
> different results. The draft "XProc: An XML Pipeline Language" document
> begins to address concerns presented in the W3C "XML Processing Model
> Requirements and Use Cases" specification, released in April 2006. From
> the XProc Introduction: "An XML Pipeline specifies a sequence of
> operations to be performed on a collection of input documents. Pipelines
> take zero or more XML documents as their input and produce zero or more
> XML documents as their output. Steps in the pipeline may read or write
> non-XML resources as well. A pipeline consists of components. Like
> pipelines, components take zero or more XML documents as their input
> and produce zero or more XML documents as their output. The inputs to a
> component come from the web, from the pipeline document, from the inputs
> to the pipeline itself, or from the outputs of other components in the
> pipeline. The outputs from a component are consumed by other components,
> are outputs of the pipeline as a whole, or are discarded. There are two
> kinds of components: steps and (language) constructs. Steps carry out
> single operations and have no substructure as far as the pipeline is
> concerned, whereas constructs can include components within themselves.
> See also Norm Walsh's blog:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message