Introduction
A large and growing set of specifications describe processes operating on XML
documents. Many applications depend on the use of more than one of the many inter-related
XML family of specifications. How implementations of these specifications interact affects
interoperability. XProc: An XML Pipeline
Language is designed for describing operations to be performed on XML
documents.
An XML Pipeline specifies a sequence of operations to be performed on a
collection of XML input documents. Pipelines take zero or more XML documents as their
input and produce zero or more XML documents as their output. A pipeline consists of
steps. Like pipelines, steps take zero or more XML documents as their inputs and produce
zero or more XML documents as their outputs. The inputs of a step come from the web, from
the pipeline document, from the inputs to the pipeline itself, or from the outputs of
other steps in the pipeline. The outputs from a step are consumed by other steps, are
outputs of the pipeline as a whole, or are discarded. There are three kinds of steps:
atomic steps, compound steps, and multi-container steps. Atomic steps carry out single
operations and have no substructure as far as the pipeline is concerned. Compound steps
and multi-container steps control the execution of other steps, which they include in the
form of one or more subpipelines.
-- XProc: An XML Pipeline Language
This specification contains requirements for an anticipated XProc
V.next. This specification is concerned with the conceptual model of XML process
interactions, the language for the description of these interactions, and the inputs and
outputs of the overall process. This specification is not generally concerned with the
implementations of actual XML processes participating in these interactions.
XProc V.next Goals
The editors intend to enumerate the Working Group's goals for XProc
V.next to guide our efforts, and these may ultimately inform .
-
Improving ease of use (syntactic improvements)
-
Improving ease of use (increasing the scope: non XML content, for example)
-
Addressing known shortcomings in the language
-
Improve relationship with streaming and parallel processing
Editorial Process
The following is a strawman list; it has no standing with the Working Group and is likely
to be replaced and/or expanded daily until further notice.
-
Iterate until ready to declare success. (<p:iterate-until value="success" />)
-
Review .
-
Review .
-
Review .
-
Review
-
Gather and review
-
Gather and review
-
Audit existing
-
Gather and review
-
Gather and review input from stakeholders.
-
-
-
.
-
.
-
-
Discuss.
-
Update existing definitions, design principles, requirements and use cases.
-
Enumerate new definitions, design principles, requirements and use cases.
-
Review.
-
Approve.
-
Publish.
Design Principles
The Working Group should review the design principles included here to determine whether
changes are warranted in light of the publication of XProc: An XML Pipeline Language.
Additional design principles may be warranted and will be added as needed.
Please note that section numbering has been added to facilitate hypertextual references
to the individual design principles.
The design principles described in this document are requirements whose compliance with is
an overall goal for the specification. It is not necessarily the case that a specific
feature meets the requirement. Instead, it should be viewed that the whole set of
specifications related to this requirements document meet that overall goal specified in the
design principle.
Technology Neutral
Applications should be free to implement XML processing using appropriate technologies
such as SAX, DOM, or other infoset representations.
Platform Neutral
Application computing platforms should not be limited to any particular class of
platforms such as clients, servers, distributed computing infrastructures, etc. In
addition, the resulting specifications should not be swayed by the specifics of use in
those platform.
Small and Simple
The language should be as small and simple as practical. It should be "small" in the
sense that simple processing should be able to stated in a compact way and "simple" in the
sense the specification of more complex processing steps do not require arduous
specification steps in the XML Pipeline Specification
Document.
Infoset Processing
At a minimum, an XML document is represented and manipulated as an XML Information Set. The use of supersets, augmented information sets, or
data models that can be represented or conceptualized as information sets should be
allowed, and in some instances, encouraged (e.g. for the XPath 2.0 Data Model).
Relates to
Straightforward Core Implementation
It should be relatively easy to implement a conforming implementation of the language but
it should also be possible to build a sophisticated implementation that implements its own
optimizations and integrates with other technologies.
Address Practical Interoperability
An XML Pipeline must be able to be exchanged
between different software systems with a minimum expectation of the same result for the
pipeline given that the XML Pipeline Environment is
the same. A reasonable resolution to platform differences for binding or serialization of
resulting infosets should be expected to be address by this specification or by re-use of
existing specifications.
Validation of XML Pipeline Documents by a Schema
The XML Pipeline Specification Document should be able
to be validated by both W3C XML Schema and RelaxNG.
Probably should add Schematron.
Reuse and Support for Existing Specifications
XML Pipelines need to support existing XML
specifications and reuse common design patterns from within them. In addition, there must
be support for the use of future specifications as much as possible.
Arbitrary Components
The specification should allow use of any component technology
that can consume or produce XML Information Sets.
Control of Inputs and Outputs
An XML Pipeline must allow control over specifying
both the inputs and outputs of any process within the pipeline. This applies to the inputs
and outputs of both the XML Pipeline and its
containing steps. It should also allow for the case where there might be multiple inputs
and outputs.
Control of Flow and Errors
An XML Pipeline must allow control of the explicit and implicit handling of the flow of documents between steps.
When errors occur, these must be able to be handled explicitly to allow alternate courses
of action within the XML Pipeline.
Requirements
In this section, Editor's Notes appended to each sub-section provide commentary on the
status of each requirement. In particular, the editors have made note of whether a
requirement has been demonstrably "Satisfied" or whether it remains
"Unsatisfied". In the case of requirements that remain Unsatisfied, the
editors intend to record potential solutions, in the form of proposals for new steps or
changes to existing steps. In the case of demonstrably Satisfied requirements, the editors
intend to provide examples, or links to examples, especially those in XProc: An XML Pipeline Language.
Standard Names in Step Inventory
XProc must have standard names for atomic steps that correspond with, but not limited to,
the following specifications :
-
XML Base
-
XInclude
-
XSLT ,
-
XSL FO
-
XQuery
-
XPath and Functions ,
-
XML Schema
-
RELAX NG.
-
Schematron
-
HTTP Request and Authentication
Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is satisfied.
Allow Defining New Components and Steps
An XML Pipeline must allow applications to define
and share new steps that use new or existing components.
Satisfied
20120407
The ability to define additional step types is Implementation-defined.
Minimal Component Support for Interoperability
There must be a minimal inventory of components
defined by the specification that are required to be supported to facilitate
interoperability of XML Pipelines.
XProc identifies its Standard
Step Library and subdivides it into Required Steps and Optional Steps.
Satisfied
20120407
Minimal Component Support has been defined.
Allow Pipeline Composition
Mechanisms for XML Pipeline composition for re-use
or re-purposing must be provided within the XML Pipeline
Specification Document.
Satisfied
20120407
See Example 1. A simple, linear
XInclude/Validate pipeline
Iteration of Documents and Elements
XML Pipelines should allow iteration of a specific
set of steps over a collection of documents and or elements
within a document.
Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is satisfied. Both p:for-each and p:viewport process a sequence
of documents. Relates to
Conditional Processing of Inputs
To allow run-time selection of steps, XML Pipelines should provide mechanisms for conditional
processing of documents or elements within documents based on expression evaluation.
Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is satisfied. See Figure 2, “A validate and transform
pipeline”.
Error Handling and Fall-back
XML Pipelines must provide mechanisms for
addressing error handling and fall-back behaviors.
Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is at least partially satisfied by XProc: All steps have an
implicit output port for reporting errors; error handling and fallback are manageable
through use of p:try. and
p:catch. Relates to
Support for the XPath 2.0 Data Model
Relates to
XML Pipelines must support the XPath 2.0 Data Model
to allow support for XPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0, and XQuery as steps.
At this point, there is no consensus in the working group that minimal conforming
implementations are required to support the XPath 2.0 Data Model.
Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is satisfied, with the caveats noted in 2.6 XPaths in XProc. There
have been suggestions that support for the XPath 2.0 Data Model should be required.
Allow Optimizations
An XML Pipeline should not inhibit a sophisticated
implementation from performing parallel operations, lazy or greedy processing, and other
optimizations.
Partially Satisfied
20120407
This requirement is partially satisfied, with the caveats noted in H Sequential steps, parallelism, and
side-effects. That is, XProc does not inhibit sophisticated
implementations; pipelines which take advantage of implementation features may be less
interoperable. See Editors' Notes under
Streaming XML Pipelines
An XML Pipeline should allow for the existence of
streaming pipelines in certain instances as an optional optimization.
Unsatisfied
20120407
This requirement neither explicitly satisfied nor unsatisfied by anything in the
language or an existence proof, except as noted 7.1.23
p:split-sequence.
We observe that streaming, parallel processing and clustering are optimizations
that may impose requirements on various aspects of processor implementation and pipeline
design. Notably, any step, atomic or otherwise, that buffers its input or output can be
an impediment to streaming. Documentation about the streamability of each atomic step
may be warranted. Pipeline design can also affect the ability to process a stream, or to
process parallel streams. The editors note the absence of streaming XProc processors or
exemplars of parallel pipelines from which to interpolate requirements. The editors
therefore request that the WG engage in a targeted discussion of the design principles
and requirements incumbent upon XProc in support of Streaming, Parallel Processing and
Clustering. See Usability: . See also Use Cases:
and .
Use cases
This section contains a set of use cases that supported our requirements and informed our
design. While there was a want to address all the use cases listed in this document, in the
end, the first version may not have solved all the following use cases. Those unsolved use
cases may be migrated into XProc V.next.
In this section, Editor's Notes appended to each sub-section provide commentary on the
status of each Use Case. In particular, the editors have made note of whether a Use Case
has been demonstrably "Satisfied" or whether it remains
"Unsatisfied". A "TBD" anotation indicates that the status has yet to be
ascertained. Some use cases may be only partially satisfied.
In the case of requirements that remain Unsatisfied, the editors intend to record
potential solutions, in the form of proposals for new steps or changes to existing steps.
In the case of demonstrably Satisfied requirements, the editors intend to provide
illustrative examples, or links to examples, especially those in the XProc: An XML Pipeline Language.
Note that these determinations of status are subject to change, especially in the early
stages of the development of this document. -- MM
Apply a Sequence of Operations
Apply a sequence of operations such XInclude, validation, and transformation to a
document, aborting if the result or an intermediate stage is not valid.
(source: )
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is satisfied by Example 1. A simple, linear
XInclude/Validate pipeline in the Introduction
XInclude Processing
-
Retrieve a document containing XInclude instructions.
-
Locate documents to be included.
-
Perform XInclude inclusion.
-
Return a single XML document.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is satisfied by Example 1. A simple, linear
XInclude/Validate pipeline in the Introduction
Parse/Validate/Transform
-
Parse the XML.
-
Perform XInclude.
-
Validate with Relax NG, possibly aborting if not valid.
-
Validate with W3C XML Schema, possibly aborting if not valid.
-
Transform.
(source: Norm
Walsh)
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is almost satisfied by Examples 1-3 in the Introduction. The example
does not include Relax NG validation, but it could have, and Schematron as well.
Document Aggregation
-
Locate a collection of documents to aggregate.
-
Perform aggregation under a new document element.
-
Return a single XML document.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in p:for-each
Single-file Command-line Document Processing
-
Read a DocBook document.
-
Validate the document.
-
Process it with XSLT.
-
Validate the resulting XHTML.
-
Save the HTML file using HTML serialization.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
Satisfied
20120407
Although the processing scenario described above is exemplified in p:for-each, the command-line
requirement is considered to be implementation defined. ["How outside values are
specified for pipeline parameters on the pipeline initially invoked by the processor is
implementation-defined. In other words, the command line options, APIs, or other
mechanisms available to specify such parameter values are outside the scope of [XProc
1.0]."]
Multiple-file Command-line Document Generation
-
Read a list of source documents.
-
For each document in the list:
-
Read the document.
-
Perform a series of XSLT transformations.
-
Serialize each result.
-
Alternatively, aggregate the resulting documents and serialize a single result.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
Satisfied
20120407
Although the processing scenario described above is exemplified in p:for-each, the command-line
requirement is considered to be implementation defined. ["How outside values are
specified for pipeline parameters on the pipeline initially invoked by the processor is
implementation-defined. In other words, the command line options, APIs, or other
mechanisms available to specify such parameter values are outside the scope of [XProc
1.0]."]
Style an XML Document in a Browser
Style an XML document in a browser with one of several different stylesheets without
having multiple copies of the document containing different xml-stylesheet directives.
(source: )
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in p:for-each
Run a Custom Program
Run a program of your own, with some parameters, on an XML file and display the result in
a browser.
(source: )
Satisfied
20120412
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in the following example.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<p:declare-step
xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step"
xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc"
xmlns:cx="http://xmlcalabash.com/ns/extensions"
version="1.0" exclude-inline-prefixes="cx c p">
<p:input port="source">
<p:inline>
<test/>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
<p:output port="result"/>
<p:exec command="/bin/cat" result-is-xml="true"/>
</p:declare-step>
will generate
<c:result xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step">
<test/>
</c:result>
XInclude and Sign
-
Process an XML document through XInclude.
-
Transform the result with XSLT using a fixed transformation.
-
Digitally sign the result with XML Signatures.
(source: Henry
Thompson)
XInclude Satisfied
This use case is satisfied.
XML Signatures Unsatisfied
This use case is not satisfied. The editors note that this Use Case cannot be
satisfied unless/until a new sign step is created. Accordingly, a
sign step has been included in the list of proposed new steps. The chair
has noted that design and implementation of a sign step could prove
difficult and that another group is likely better equipped to produce a solution.
Discuss.
Make Absolute URLs
-
Process an XML document through XInclude.
-
Remove any xml:base attributes anywhere in the resulting document.
-
Schema validate the document with a fixed schema.
-
For all elements or attributes whose type is xs:anyURI, resolve the value against the
base URI to create an absolute URI. Replace the value in the document with the
resulting absolute URI.
This example assumes preservation of infoset ([base URI]) and PSVI ([type definition])
properties from step to step. Also, there is no way to reorder these steps as the schema
doesn't accept xml:base attributes but the expansion requires xs:anyURI typed values.
(source: Henry
Thompson)
Satisfied
20120407
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in 7.2.10
p:xsl-formatter
A Simple Transformation Service
Alex to refactor these use cases:
-
-
-
-
Extract XML document (XForms instance) from an HTTP request body
-
Execute XSLT transformation on that document.
-
Call a persistence service with resulting document
-
Return the XML document from persistence service (new XForms instance) as the HTTP
response body.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Alex to write example and description of persistence.
Service Request/Response Handling on a Handheld
Allow an application on a handheld device to construct a pipeline, send the pipeline and
some data to the server, allow the server to process the pipeline and send the result
back.
(source: )
TBD
20120419
This use case is UNSATISFIED and deemed not worth the effort to prove. The Use
Case is underspecified and we estimate that it would cost up to 1/2 day to create
example of working pipeline in mobile browser, as suggested by VT.
Interact with Web Service (Tide Information)
-
Parse the incoming XML request.
-
Construct a URL to a REST-style web service at the NOAA (see website).
-
Parse the resulting invalid HTML document with by translating and fixing the HTML to
make it XHTML (e.g. use TagSoup or tidy).
-
Extract the tide information from a plain-text table of data from document by
applying a regular expression and creating markup from the matches.
-
Use XQuery to select the high and low tides.
-
Formulate an XML response from that tide information.
(source: Alex
Milowski)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Alex to write a pipeline to demonstrate.
XQuery and XSLT 2.0 Collections
In XQuery and XSLT 2.0 there is the idea of an input and output collection and a pipeline
must be able to consume or produce collections of documents both as inputs or outputs of
steps as well as whole pipelines.
For example, for input collections:
-
Accept a collection of documents.
-
Apply a single XSLT 2.0 transformation that processes the collection and produces
another collection.
-
Serialize the collection to files or URIs.
For example, for output collections:
-
Accept a single document as input.
-
Apply an XQuery that produces a sequence of documents (a collection).
-
Serialize the collection to files or URIs.
Satisfied
20120425
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified the sample pipeline.
<p:pipeline name="main" version="1.0"
xmlns:cx="http://xmlcalabash.com/ns/extensions"
xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
<p:declare-step type="cx:collection-manager">
<p:input port="source" sequence="true"/>
<p:output port="result" sequence="true" primary="false"/>
<p:option name="href" required="true"/>
</p:declare-step>
<cx:collection-manager name="cxmgr" href="http://example.org/collection">
<p:input port="source">
<p:inline><doc1/></p:inline>
<p:inline><doc2/></p:inline>
<p:inline><doc3/></p:inline>
</p:input>
</cx:collection-manager>
<p:xslt>
<p:input port="source">
<p:pipe step="cxmgr" port="result"/>
</p:input>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:inline>
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" version="2.0">
<xsl:output method="xml" encoding="utf-8" indent="no" omit-xml-declaration="yes"/>
<xsl:param name="collection" select="'http://example.org/collection'"/>
<xsl:template match="/">
<collection uri="{$collection}">
<xsl:value-of select="count(collection($collection))"/>
</collection>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:pipeline>
An AJAX Server
-
Receive XML request with word to complete.
-
Call a sub-pipeline that retrieves list of completions for that word.
-
Format resulting document with XSLT.
-
Serialize response to XML.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
REFACTOR
This use case to be refactored into
Dynamic XQuery
-
Dynamically create an XQuery query using XSLT, based on input XML document.
-
Execute the XQuery against a database.
-
Construct an XHTML result page using XSLT from the result of the query.
-
Serialize response to HTML.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Norm to write a pipeline to demonstrate.
This pipeline accepts a "uri" document on the source port, uses that URI to construct a
(brain-dead simple) query against a database, runs that query, and styles the result.
<p:declare-step name="main" version="1.0"
xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step"
xmlns:ml="http://xmlcalabash.com/ns/extensions/marklogic"
xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
<p:input port="source">
<p:inline>
<uri>/2003/08/20/fungus</uri>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
<p:output port="result"/>
<p:input port="parameters" kind="parameter"/>
<p:declare-step type="ml:adhoc-query">
<p:input port="source"/>
<p:input port="parameters" kind="parameter"/>
<p:output port="result" sequence="true"/>
<p:option name="host"/>
<p:option name="port"/>
<p:option name="user"/>
<p:option name="password"/>
<p:option name="content-base"/>
<p:option name="wrapper"/>
</p:declare-step>
<p:template>
<p:input port="template">
<p:inline>
<c:xquery>
doc("/production{string(/uri)}.xml")
</c:xquery>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
<p:input port="source">
<p:pipe step="main" port="source"/>
</p:input>
</p:template>
<ml:adhoc-query host="localhost" port="8404" user="admin" password="password"/>
<p:xslt>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:document href="essay.xsl"/>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:declare-step>
Read/Write Non-XML File
Relates to and
and
-
Read a CSV file and convert it to XML.
-
Process the document with XSLT.
-
Convert the result to a CSV format using text serialization.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
UNSATISFIED
20120407
This use case is UNSATISFIED. Relates to XProc Architecture: . An example, possibly relying on a shell command for
conversion to/from CSV format could be constructed, but that would miss the point; XProc
could/should have native ability to convert to/from trivial data formats such as CSV and
JSON. Presumably there are algorithmic transforms. Vojtech to provide reference to XML
Prague paper.
The specific use case described in 5.19 (converting a CSV file to XML) can be
solved by using XSLT 2.0 to tokenize the CSV data and turn it into XML. The example below
uses the stylesheet developed by Andrew Welsh
(http://andrewjwelch.com/code/xslt/csv/csv-to-xml_v2.html):
<p:declare-step >
<p:output port="result"/>
<p:option name="pathToCSV" required="true"/>
<p:xslt template-name="main">
<p:input port="source">
<p:empty/>
</p:input>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:document href="http://andrewjwelch.com/code/xslt/csv/csv-to-xml_v2.xslt"/>
</p:input>
<!-- note that relative paths are resolved against the stylesheet's base URI -->
<p:with-param name="pathToCSV" select="$pathToCSV"/>
</p:xslt>
</p:declare-step>
In this solution, the stylesheet loads the CSV file. I think it should be
straightforward to modify the pipeline/stylesheet so that the pipeline itself loads the
CSV file (using p:data or p:http-request) and passes the c:data-wrapped representation to
the stylesheet.
Update/Insert Document in Database
-
Receive an XML document to save.
-
Check the database to see if the document exists.
-
If the document exists, update the document.
-
If the document does not exists, add the document.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
20120419
This use case is TBD.. There is no specific language in XProc: An XML Pipeline Language to
suggest communication with a database engine. Certainly, there are no references to SQL
or other database languages. Examples available from Norm, Vojtech. Requirement for new
atomic steps for database access? This is an open issue.
Need an example showing a step accessing a DB.
Content-Dependent Transformations
-
Receive an XML document to format.
-
If the document is XHTML, apply a theme via XSLT and serialize as HTML.
-
If the document is XSL-FO, apply an XSL FO processor to produce PDF.
-
Otherwise, serialize the document as XML.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Vojtech to write pipeline to demonstrate.
This one is a little tricky as XProc does not support specifying serialization options on
output ports dynamically. Because of that, it is not possible to write a pipeline with a
single "result" output port that uses different serialization options that depend on the
(dynamic) data content type. One solution is to have multiple output ports ("result-html",
"result-xml", ...) with different serialization options, but that's probably silly and too
inconvenient to work with (plus it does not work with non-XML data). Another solution is
not to have any output ports at all and use p:store instead. The drawback of this is that
p:store writes the data to an external location and therefore breaks the pipeline flow,
but you can have multiple p:store steps with different serialization options, or you can
even set the serialization options on p:store dynamically. Because the p:xsl-formatter
renders the XSL-FO document to an external location, I went for the p:store solution:
<p:declare-step
xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
xmlns:fo="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Format">
<p:input port="source"/>
<p:option name="output" required="true"/>
<p:choose>
<p:when test="/html:html">
<!-- apply a theme using XSLT and serialize as HTML -->
<p:xslt>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:document href="style.xsl"/>
</p:input>
<p:input port="parameters">
<p:empty/>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
<p:store method="html">
<p:with-option name="href" select="$output"/>
</p:store>
</p:when>
<p:when test="/fo:root">
<!-- apply an XSL-FO processor-->
<p:xsl-formatter>
<p:with-option name="href" select="$output"/>
<p:input port="parameters">
<p:empty/>
</p:input>
</p:xsl-formatter>
</p:when>
<p:otherwise>
<!-- serialize as XML -->
<p:store>
<p:with-option name="href" select="$output"/>
</p:store>
</p:otherwise>
</p:choose>
</p:declare-step>
Configuration-Dependent Transformations
Mobile example:
-
Receive an XML document to format.
-
If the configuration is "desktop browser", apply desktop XSLT and serialize as
HTML.
-
If the configuration is "mobile browser", apply mobile XSLT and serialize as
XHTML.
News feed example:
-
Receive an XML document in Atom format.
-
If the configuration is "RSS 1.0", apply "Atom to RSS 1.0" XSLT.
-
If the configuration is "RSS 2.0", apply "Atom to RSS 2.0" XSLT.
-
Serialize the document as XML.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Vojtech to write pipeline to demonstrate.
The newsfeed example (the mobile example is just a combination of the newsfeed example
and 5.21):
<p:pipeline >
<p:option name="configuration" required="true"/>
<p:choose>
<p:when test="$configuration='RSS 1.0'">
<p:xslt>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:document href="atom-to-rss-10.xsl"/>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:when>
<p:when test="$configuration='RSS 2.0'">
<p:xslt>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:document href="atom-to-rss-20.xsl"/>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:when>
</p:choose>
</p:pipeline>
Response to XML-RPC Request
-
Receive an XML-RPC request.
-
Validate the XML-RPC request with a RelaxNG schema.
-
Dispatch to different sub-pipelines depending on the content of
/methodCall/methodName.
-
Format the sub-pipeline response to XML-RPC format via XSLT.
-
Validate the XML-RPC response with an W3C XML Schema.
-
Return the XML-RPC response.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Duplicates and
. Some conditional sub-pipeline. Vojtech to write
pipeline to demonstrate.
This pipeline takes an XML-RPC request document and invokes a method (an XProc
pipeline) based on the value of /methodCall/methodName. Because there is no standard
p:eval step for dynamic evaluation of XProc pipelines, we have to use p:choose which lists
all possible pipelines statically.
The pipeline below is rather simplistic in the sense that it does not try to
interpret XMLRPC's "int", "string", "struct", etc. elements. The input data is passed in
the original XMLRPC format to the invoked pipelines, and likewise, the pipelines are
expected to represent their results in XMLRPC format.
<p:pipeline xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc"
version="1.0"
xmlns:ex="http://www.example.org">
<!-- Defines various 'method' pipelines in the "http://www.example.org" namespace.
Pipeline interface contract:
- a single (primary) input port
- a single (primary output port)
- expect a single <params> input document
- produce a single <params> or <fault> output document
-->
<p:import href="method-library.xpl"/>
<p:pipeline type="ex:invoke-method">
<p:variable name="method" select="/methodCall/methodName"/>
<p:identity>
<p:input port="source" select="/methodCall/params"/>
</p:identity>
<p:try>
<p:group>
<!-- Note: the p:choose could be replaced with a single call
to p:eval if we had such a step -->
<p:choose>
<p:when test="$method = 'method1'">
<ex:method1/>
</p:when>
<p:when test="$method = 'method2'">
<ex:method2/>
</p:when>
<p:otherwise>
<p:template name="error-message">
<p:input port="template">
<p:inline>
<message>Unsupported method: {$method}</message>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
<p:with-param name="method" select="$method"/>
</p:template>
<p:error code="ex:error">
<p:input port="source">
<p:pipe step="error-message" port="result"/>
</p:input>
</p:error>
</p:otherwise>
</p:choose>
</p:group>
<p:catch name="catch">
<p:template>
<p:input port="source">
<p:pipe step="catch" port="error"/>
</p:input>
<p:input port="template">
<p:inline>
<fault>
<value>
<struct>
<member>
<name>faultCode</name>
<value><int>-1</int></value>
</member>
<member>
<name>faultString</name>
<value><string>{string(/*)}</string></value>
</member>
</struct>
</value>
</fault>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
</p:template>
</p:catch>
</p:try>
<p:wrap-sequence wrapper="methodResponse"/>
</p:pipeline>
<p:validate-with-relax-ng>
<p:input port="schema">
<p:data href="xmlrpc.rnc" content-type="text/plain"/>
</p:input>
</p:validate-with-relax-ng>
<ex:invoke-method/>
<p:validate-with-xml-schema>
<p:input port="schema">
<p:document href="xmlrpc-response.xsd"/>
</p:input>
</p:validate-with-xml-schema>
</p:pipeline>
Database Import/Ingestion
Import example:
-
Read a list of source documents.
-
For each document in the list:
-
Validate the document.
-
Call a sub-pipeline to insert content into a relational or XML database.
Ingestion example:
-
Receive a directory name.
-
Produce a list of files in the directory as an XML document.
-
For each element representing a file:
-
Create an iTQL query using XSLT.
-
Query the repository to check if the file has been uploaded.
-
Upload if necessary.
-
Inspect the file to check the metadata type.
-
Transform the document with XSLT.
-
Make a SOAP call to ingest the document.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. A db Access Requirement emerges from combining with .
Someone to write up a proposal. MM to create related topics.
Metadata Retrieval
Relates to
-
Call a SOAP service with metadata format as a parameter.
-
Create an iTQL query with XSLT.
-
Query a repository for the XML document.
-
Load a list of XSLT transformations from a configuration.
-
Iteratively execute the XSLT transformations.
-
Serialize the result to XML.
(source: Erik
Bruchez)
REFACTOR
This use case to be refactored into
Non-XML Document Production
Relates to and
and
-
A non-XML document is fed into the process.
-
That input is converted into a well-formed XML document.
-
A table of contents is extracted.
-
Pagination is performed.
-
Each page is transformed into some output language.
(source: Rui
Lopes)
-
Read a non-XML document.
-
Transform.
(source: Norm
Walsh)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. See new steps.
Integrate Computation Components (MathML)
-
Select a MathML content element.
-
For that element, apply a computation (e.g. compute the kernel of a matrix).
-
Replace the input MathML with the output of the computation.
(source: Alex
Milowski)
TBD
This use case is [not] satisfied. Alex to write. See instead: refactoring at end
of
Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL) - Part 10: Validation Management
This document provides a test scenario that will be used to create validation management
scripts using a range of existing techniques, including those used for program
compilation, etc.
The steps required to validate our sample document are:
-
Use ISO 19757-4 Namespace-based Validation Dispatching Language (NVDL) to split out
the parts of the document that are encoded using HTML, SVG and MathML from the bulk of
the document, whose tags are defined using a user-defined set of markup tags.
-
Validate the HTML elements and attributes using the HTML 4.0 DTD (W3C XML DTD).
-
Use a set of Schematron rules stored in check-metadata.xml to ensure that the
metadata of the HTML elements defined using Dublin Core semantics conform to the
information in the document about the document's title and subtitle, author, encoding
type, etc.
-
Validate the SVG components of the file using the standard W3C schema provided in the
SVG 1.2 specification.
-
Use the Schematron rules defined in SVG-subset.xml to ensure that the SVG file only
uses those features of SVG that are valid for the particular SVG viewer available to
the system.
-
Validate the MathML components using the latest version of the MathML schema (defined
in RELAX-NG) to ensure that all maths fragments are valid. The schema will make use
the datatype definitions in check-maths.xml to validate the contents of specific
elements.
-
Use MathML-SVG.xslt to transform the MathML segments to displayable SVG and replace
each MathML fragment with its SVG equivalent.
-
Use the ISO 19757-8 Document Schema Renaming Language (DSRL) definitions in
convert-mynames.xml to convert the tags in the local nameset to the form that can be
used to validate the remaining part of the document using docbook.dtd.
-
Use the IS0 19757-7 Character Repertoire Definition Language (CRDL) rules defined in
mycharacter-checks.xml to validate that the correct character sets have been used for
text identified as being Greek and Cyrillic.
-
Convert the Docbook tags to HTML so that they can be displayed in a web browser using
the docbook-html.xslt transformation rules.
Each validation script should allow the four streams produced by step 1 to be run in
parallel without requiring the other validations to be carried out if there is an error in
another stream. This means that steps 2 and 3 should be carried out in parallel to steps 4
and 5, and/or steps 6 and 7 and/or steps 8 and 9. After completion of step 10 the HTML
(both streams), and SVG (both streams) should be recombined to produce a single stream
that can fed to a web browser. The flow is illustrated in the following diagram:
![DSDL use case graphic]()
(source: Martin
Bryan)
TBD
This use case is not satisfied. Proposed new step
relates to this Use Case. Should we allow steps to have varying # of outputs. Norm to
write up an explanation of related problems. p:manifold? Henry doubts it's worth the
effort.
Large-Document Subtree Iteration
Relates to
Relates to
Running XSLT on a very large document isn't typically practical. In these cases, it is
often the case that a particular element, that may be repeated over-and-over again, needs
to be transformed. Conceptually, a pipeline could limit the transformation to a subtree
by:
-
Limiting the transform to a subtree of the document identified by an XPath.
-
For each subtree, cache the subtree and build a whole document with the identified
element as the document element and then run a transform to replace that subtree in
the original document.
-
For any non-matches, the document remains the same and "streams" around the
transform.
This allows the transform and the tree building to be limited to a small subtree and the
rest of the process to stream. As such, an arbitrarily large document can be processed in
a bounded amount of memory.
(source: Alex
Milowski)
Alex Milowski
Satisfied
30 May 2012
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in the example below. Merge with 5.30
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <p:declare-step
xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc" xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step"
version="1.0" xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <p:input port="source">
<p:inline> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head><title>Test
Document</title></head> <body> <div class="main"> <p>I can be arbitrarily
large.</p> </div> </body> </html> </p:inline> </p:input> <p:output
port="result"/> <p:insert position="first-child" match="/xhtml:html/xhtml:body">
<p:input port="insertion" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <p:inline> <ul
class="navigation"> <li><a href="/about/">About</a></li> <li><a
href="/xml/">Fantastic XML Stuff</a></li> <li><a href="/cats/">Pictures of
Cats</a></li> </ul> </p:inline> </p:input> </p:insert>
</p:declare-step>
Adding Navigation to an Arbitrarily Large Document
Relates to
For a particular website, every XHTML document needs to have navigation elements added to
the document. The navigation is static text that surrounds the body of the document. This
navigation is added by:
-
Matching the head and body elements using a XPath expression that can be
streamed.
-
Inserting a stub for a transformation for including the style and surrounding
navigation of the site.
-
For each of the stubs, transformations insert the markup using a subtree expansion
that allows the rest of the document to stream.
In the end, the pipeline allows arbitrarily large XHTML document to be processed with a
near-constant cost.
(source: Alex Milowski)
Alex Milowski
Satisfied
30 May 2012
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in the example above.
Fallback to Choice of XSLT Processor
Relates to
A step in a pipeline produces multiple output documents. In XSLT 2.0, this is a standard
feature of all XSLT 2.0 processors. In XSLT 1.0, this is not standard.
A pipeline author wants to write a pipeline that, at compile-time, the implementation
chooses XSLT 2.0 when possible and degrades to XSLT 1.0 when XSLT 2.0 is not supported.
In the case of XSLT 1.0, the step will use XSLT extensions to support the multiple output
documents--which again may fail. Fortunately, the XSLT 1.0 transformation can be written
to test for this.
(source: Alex Milowski)
UNSATISFIED
This use case is [not] satisfied, as exemplified in TBD. Try/catch no good. Vojtech & Norm. XSLT 1.0 processor does not
handle.
The pipeline below does the following:
-
Checks if XSLT 2.0 is supported.
-
If XSLT 2.0 is available, it applies an XSLT 2.0 stylesheet to the input XML
document. The stylesheet uses xsl:result-document to generate secondary output
documents.
-
If XSLT 2.0 is not available, it applies an XSLT 1.0 stylesheet. The stylesheet uses
either the exsl:document or result:write extension (whichever is available) to
generate secondary output documents.
The pipeline has two output ports: the "result" output port for the primary result of the
XSLT transformation, and "secondary" for the secondary documents.
...the pipeline almost works. The problem is with the XSLT 1.0 transformation, because
the secondary documents do not appear on the "secondary" step of the p:xslt step. This is
actually a requirement made by the XProc specification: "If XSLT 1.0 is used, an empty
sequence of documents must appear on the secondary port." The exact behavior of
exsl:document and result:write in the XProc context is implementation-defined; in most
cases, the generated documents will be simply written to the specified external
location.
<p:pipeline name="main"
xmlns:ex="http://www.example.org" >
<p:output port="secondary" sequence="true">
<p:pipe step="process" port="secondary"/>
</p:output>
<p:declare-step type="ex:is-xslt20-supported">
<p:output port="result"/>
<p:try>
<p:group>
<p:xslt version="2.0">
<p:input port="source"><p:inline><foo/></p:inline></p:input>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:inline>
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" version="2.0">
<xsl:template match="/">
<true><xsl:value-of select="1 to 2"/></true>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
<p:input port="parameters"><p:empty/></p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:group>
<p:catch>
<p:identity>
<p:input port="source">
<p:inline><false/></p:inline>
</p:input>
</p:identity>
</p:catch>
</p:try>
</p:declare-step>
<ex:is-xslt20-supported/>
<p:choose name="process">
<p:when test="/true">
<p:output port="result" primary="true"/>
<p:output port="secondary" sequence="true">
<p:pipe step="xslt" port="secondary"/>
</p:output>
<p:xslt name="xslt" version="2.0">
<p:input port="source"><p:pipe step="main" port="source"/></p:input>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:inline>
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" version="2.0">
<xsl:template name="generate-secondary-content">
<doc>Hello world!</doc>
</xsl:template>
<xsl:template match="/">
<xsl:result-document href="foo.xml">
<xsl:call-template name="generate-secondary-content"/>
</xsl:result-document>
<ignored/>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:when>
<p:otherwise>
<p:output port="result" primary="true"/>
<p:output port="secondary" sequence="true">
<p:pipe step="xslt" port="secondary"/>
</p:output>
<p:xslt name="xslt" version="1.0">
<p:input port="source"><p:pipe step="main" port="source"/></p:input>
<p:input port="stylesheet">
<p:inline>
<xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
xmlns:exsl="http://exslt.org/common"
xmlns:redirect="http://xml.apache.org/xalan/redirect"
extension-element-prefixes="exsl redirect" version="1.0">
<xsl:template name="generate-secondary-content">
<doc>Hello world!</doc>
</xsl:template>
<xsl:template match="/">
<exsl:document href="foo.xml">
<xsl:call-template name="generate-secondary-content"/>
<xsl:fallback>
<redirect:write file="foo.xml">
<xsl:call-template name="generate-secondary-content"/>
</redirect:write>
</xsl:fallback>
</exsl:document>
<ignored/>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>
</p:inline>
</p:input>
</p:xslt>
</p:otherwise>
</p:choose>
</p:pipeline>
No Fallback for XQuery Causes Error
Relates to
As the final step in a pipeline, XQuery is required to be run. If the XQuery step is not
available, the compilation of the pipeline needs to fail. Here the pipeline author has
chosen that the pipeline must not run if XQuery is not available.
(source: Alex Milowski)
Alex Milowski
SATISFIED
This use case is satisfied, as exemplified in the following example. Step
available. Fails at run time rather than compile time.
<p:declare-step xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc"
xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc-step" version="1.0"> <p:output port="result"/>
<p:template> <p:input port="template"> <p:inline> <root> Is XQuery available :
{ $has-xquery } </root> </p:inline> </p:input> <p:input port="source">
<p:empty/> </p:input> <p:with-param name="has-xquery"
select="p:step-available('p:xquery')"/> </p:template> </p:declare-step>