Re: XMLPipe model: should we change the name?

Michael Pediaditakis wrote:
> We are in the process of finishing the implementation of
> a model (in Java) that realises a number of ideas on
> transformation pipelining, heterogeneous documents
> combination and handling and a way to semi-automatically
> produce the correct combination of transformations for a
> specific application profile.
> 
> Now, the core aspect of the whole architecture is the
> pipelining of transformations (mainly XSL-T) for the
> XML documents... And thus, the original name that I thought
> to give to the whole model and the implementation is
> "XMLPipe".

TransformationPipe? (t12nPipe?) XSLTPipe?
Perhaps something incorporating the word "flow" or "chain"?

> XML* names should be reserved for W3C products and recommendations 

Too late. Although in XML documents, yes, they reserve the xml* names :)

> So, my question is: Do you think that I should change the
> name before we make a public release of the model and implementation?

I'm surprised you didn't lock yourself into a name when you were making the
prototype, like the rest of us do :) Having the chance to change the name of
your product just before release, and to put some serious thought behind it is
a luxury many companies don't have.

One thing that we noticed when implementing stylesheet chaining/pipelining/
whatever in 4Suite (see, I can advertise, too) is the problem of what to do
with external stylesheet parameters. Say you want to pass the output of
stylesheet 1 to stylesheet 2, and stylesheet 2 needs some top-level parameters
passed in. For now we just don't do anything; only the first stylesheet in the
chain gets that privilege. So I'm curious... what does your system do in this
regard? Or if you prefer not to divulge, what do people think a system
*should* do?

Mike

-- 
  Mike J. Brown   |  http://skew.org/~mike/resume/
  Denver, CO, USA |  http://skew.org/xml/

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list