You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The p:error step has a source port with sequence="true". The spec leaves it unspecified what must happen when there are multiple documents on the source port. There are, I think, two options:
Use a separate c:error element for each incoming document
Add all incoming documents as children of a single c:error element.
To me the first makes more sense. It would allow you to raises multiple errors in one go. But it is not a very strong preference.
I would like to hear opinions and I think we should specify this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think it's a sequence so that it's optional, but one could pass multiple documents so we should specify what that means. I agree that separate c:error elements makes the most sense.
Actually, on closer inspection, you can only provide one error code and that's on the c:error element, so maybe it makes more sense to say that multiple documents should be children of the c:error element.
On any other step, I'd be inclined to say that we should make it an error to provide more than one input, but on the p:error step, that just invites confusion I think: "error: your error was in error, it had more than one input"
The
p:error
step has asource
port withsequence="true"
. The spec leaves it unspecified what must happen when there are multiple documents on thesource
port. There are, I think, two options:c:error
element for each incoming documentc:error
element.To me the first makes more sense. It would allow you to raises multiple errors in one go. But it is not a very strong preference.
I would like to hear opinions and I think we should specify this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: