W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > April 2008

XProc Minutes 3 Apr 2008

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 11:58:16 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m28wzv3p7r.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/03-minutes

W3C[1]

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

Meeting 106, 03 Apr 2008

   Agenda[2]

   See also: IRC log[3]

Attendees

   Present
           Alex, Paul, Richard, Norm, Vojtech, Andrew

   Regrets

   Chair
           Norm

   Scribe
           Norm

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Accept this agenda?
         2. Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. Welcome Vojtech Toman
         4. Next meeting: telcon 10 April 2008?
         5. Consideration of the current editor's draft.
         6. Comment #83, system identifiers and base URIs
         7. What else do we need to do
         8. Any other business?
     * Summary of Action Items

     ----------------------------------------------------------------------

  Accept this agenda?

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/03-agenda

   Accepted.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/03/27-minutes

   Accepted.

  Welcome Vojtech Toman

   Introductions all around.

  Next meeting: telcon 10 April 2008?

   No regrets given.

  Consideration of the current editor's draft.

   Norm updated the draft to include Henry's comments, the tumblers, and a
   first pitiful stab at an appendix on parallel processing.

   Alex observes that the parallel processing section is currently section 8,
   probably should be an appendix.

   Norm: Yes, you're probably right, I'll move it.

   Alex: Normative?

   Norm: No, I don't think so, it's just for explanation.

  Comment #83, system identifiers and base URIs

   Vojtech: The issue I had was a simple pipeline that transformas an XML
   document. What wasn't clear was what the resulting documents base URIs
   were.
   ... Can I manipulate the base URI and assign it?
   ... If I process document.xml, I want to get document.fo, for example.
   ... Later I thought if I have a pipeline that validates a document, does
   the result have the same base URI.

   <alexmilowski> XSLT 2.0 says: "The base URI of the new element is copied
   from the base URI of the literal result element in the stylesheet, unless
   the content of the new element includes an xml:base attribute, in which
   case the base URI of the new element is the value of that attribute,
   resolved (if it is a relative URI) against the base URI of the literal
   result element in the stylesheet."

   <alexmilowski> In section 11.1

   Norm: I think steps don't change the base URI unless they explicitly say
   that they do.

   Vojtech: So even viewport and split don't change the base URI?

   Norm: Right.

   Alex: I had always imagined that a lot of the steps we have are
   identity++; and so if you think of it from that perspective, it's just
   like changing parts of the infoset, leaving the base URI alone.
   ... Maybe one of the things we have to do is explain this more carefully.
   ... We're probably underspecified.

   Norm: Yes, I think that definitely needs to be added.

   Some discussion of XPath 1.0/2.0 functions for updating base URI.

   Norm outlines his proposal for p:set-base-uri

   Some discussion of what has a base URI.

   Richard: I think we should say that the individual documents produced by
   p:viewport have the base URI of their document elements.

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to update the spec so it says this. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action01[6]]

   Alex: It seems to me that it isn't string manipulation isn't right, what
   you want is relative URI resolution.
   ... It seems to me that set-base-uri should also handle the case of
   relative URI resolution.

   Norm: That seems reasonable to me.

   Alex: If we wanted to roll this up so that implementors that don't have
   XPath 2.0 have a step to do this, we need to think about this a little bit
   more.

   Norm: I'd be very happy if we continued to expand this proposal in email.

   Some discussion of whether we want variables or functions.

   Richard: For finding base-uri, I don't think it makes any sense to have a
   variable.
   ... I think it should be a function that returns the base URI of an
   element.
   ... Maybe it just makes sense for us to provide a suite of extension
   functions in XProc.
   ... get the base URI, resolve it to an absolute URI, relativize it against
   a base URI, etc.

   Norm: Maybe my step idea was ill-conceived. Perhaps we should just make
   extension functions; that resolves the XPath version issue.

   Vojtech: I agree with this, but I think we also need to say how the base
   URI is passed between steps.

   Richard: You can't say the base URI is the same, you have to say something
   like: the base URI of the primary output is teh same as the base URI of
   the primary input unless otherwise stated.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to review the steps to clarify which ones change
   base URIs and how. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action02[7]]

   <alexmilowski>
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Feb/0017.html[8]

   Norm: I'm inclined to agree with Richard and say we should persue this
   with extension functions.

   Alex reports that it's label-elements that has a magic variable, but that
   change isn't reflected int he spec.

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to update label-elements in the spec [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action03[9]]

   <scribe> ACTION: Richard to draft a proposal for the new functions
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action04[10]]

   Norm: Are these decisions sufficient to cover issue #83?

   Vojtech: I think so.

  What else do we need to do

   1. We need to implement the decision of today, clearer prose and new
   extension functions

   2. We need to review the parallelism appendix

   3. We need to update the label-elements step, check other steps

   Vojtech: I have a question about insert.
   ... You can insert only a single document or element, should we allow a
   sequence?

   Norm: Indeed, I don't see why insertion couldn't be a sequence
   ... Anyone think we shouldn't?

   Alex: We have the same rules for detecting errors as anywhere else, so I
   think that's fine.

   Proposed: Change insertion port to be a sequence

   Accepted.

  Any other business?

   None heard.

   Adjourned.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to update label-elements in the spec [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action03[11]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to update the spec so it says this. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action01[12]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to review the steps to clarify which ones change base
   URIs and how. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action02[13]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Richard to draft a proposal for the new functions [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action04[14]]
    
   [End of minutes]

     ----------------------------------------------------------------------

   [1] http://www.w3.org/
   [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/03-agenda
   [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-irc
   [6] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [7] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Feb/0017.html
   [9] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [10] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action04
   [11] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [13] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [14] http://www.w3.org/2008/04/03-xproc-minutes.html#action04
   [15] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
   [16] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl[15] version 1.133 (CVS
    log[16])
    $Date: 2008/04/03 15:57:14 $

Received on Thursday, 3 April 2008 15:58:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 3 April 2008 15:58:56 GMT