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

XProc Minutes 29 May 2008

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 10:15:52 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2y75ls2uf.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/05/29-minutes


                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

29 May 2008


   See also: IRC log[3]


           Norm, Henry, Richard, Murray, Rui, Alex, Michael, Mohamed

           Vojtech, Paul, Andrew




     * Topics
         1. Accept this agenda?
         2. Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. Next meeting: telcon 5 June 2008
         4. Last call status
         5. p:filter
         6. Changes to p:hash
         7. C14N
         8. XSLTMatchPattern clarifications
         9. Add a limit option to p:count
        10. Any other business
     * Summary of Action Items


  Accept this agenda?

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/05/29-agenda


  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> http://www.w3.org/2008/05/15-xproc-minutes.html

   Norm: The substance was PSVI support which I think we sorted as best we
   can before a new draft.

   Henry: My action is still outstanding, but I don't think that should get
   in the way.
   ... To look for things that point outside the subtree.


  Next meeting: telcon 5 June 2008

   Regrets from Paul.

  Last call status

   Norm: We need to decide when we're ready.
   ... I think we're just about there, just the PSVI stuff I think.
   ... Can anyone think of anything we need to deal with first?

   None heard.

   Henry: It wouldn't be a bad idea to solicit feedback from our readers.

   <scribe> ACTION: Henry to setup an xproc developers list at w3.org
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action01[6]]

   Murray: The GRDDL WG is finished, I made a point of ensuring that there
   was a comment in the GRDDL spec that pointed to XProc.
   ... I wonder whether in of this groups work there is an example of an
   XProc script that takes an XML document and turns it into triples.

   Norm: I don't think we have one, but there's nothing to prevent us from
   creating one.

   Alex: Do you have a specific example in mind?

   Murray: No, but I think it should be as simple as possible.

   Norm: It would be nice if it did more than XSLT.

   Murray: All it has to do is some validation and run some RDFy kind of tool
   over the result.

   Alex: Is there an example in the GRDDL spec?

   Murray: Yes, there are a few.

   Norm: There's certainly room for more examples in the spec, and that would
   be a good one.
   ... So, coming back to last call.
   ... I was thinking along these lines: LC mid June, CR late July, PR in mid


   Mohamed: Today we can have select on p:input, which is static.
   ... I have some use cases where I need to pass an XPath expression to a
   step where the expression is constructed by the pipeline.
   ...p: load is symmetric with p:document, it would be nice to have p:filter
   symetric to select on input.

   Norm: And this is a select expression not a match because if you wanted a
   match you'd just use split-sequence and ignore the non-matched parts.

   Henry: I'm confused. In what sense is p:input static, if I had an
   expression in a variable why wouldn't that work?

   <ht> HST: What is wrong with <p:input select="$foo"/>

   Mohamed: That gives you the string of $foo, but doesn't use it to select
   parts of the document.

   <ht> Right, what you want is, as it were, <p:input><p:option name="select"

   Richard: $foo is a string which isn't a node set so it's an error.
   ... We don't require the node set to come from the document, which is a
   little surprising.

   Murray: So $foo in an argument should be evaluated to what it is.

   Richard: The select expression si $foo, and its value is teh value of $foo
   and it must be a string.
   ... And that's an error.

   Some discussion of the meaning of evaulated select expressions.

   Henry: We could make select into an option.

   Norm: I think that would be really confusing.

   <richard> we could just add a function to our xpath extensions, like
   exslt's dyn:evaluate

   Mohamed: The only thing that bothers me about that is, what's the context
   of the evaluation.
   ... I think the simplest, most compatible thing is to add p:filter.

   Murray: In a bourne shell, you can put something you want evaluated inside
   single quotes.

   <richard> (backquotes)

   Murray: I wonder whether a simple syntax solution would be a result.

   Proposal: add p:filter as Mohamed suggests


   Richard: Required or optional?

   Mohamed: p:load is required, right?

   Norm: yes.
   ... I think this is small enough and providing fairly core functionality,
   I'd make it required.

   Proposal: required?


  Changes to p:hash

   Norm attempts to summarize the hash changes.

   Mohamed: It's an optional step, so we can make it a bit stronger. For
   security reasons, sha1 and md5 are on the way out.
   ... Security considerations will require more options.
   ... And it's also valuable to provide crc even though it's not secure,
   it's widely used.

   Norm: I'm sympathetic because I had reservations about the particularly
   narrow slice I made when I first proposed p:hash.

   Proposal: change p:hash along the lines suggested by Mohamed



   Norm: Mohamed proposoes a c14n step, we could also do it on serialization.

   Henry: C14N specifies what a string looks like.
   ... It seems like we'd need this on the serialization options.
   ... Otherwise you can't output a C14N string form an XProc processor.
   ... You could have p:c14n, but it would be too limiting.

   <scribe> ACTION: Mohamed to propose serialization changes to support C14N.
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action02[7]]

  XSLTMatchPattern clarifications

   Norm: We need to say something about id(), key() the namespace axis, etc.

   Richard: key() is added by XSLT.
   ... The namespace axis isn't a problem for XPath 1 processors because they
   must implement it.
   ... The other things are the functions added by XSLT.

   Norm: On further consideration, I think id() is probably ok

   Richard: I would have thought that none of these things would be expected
   to work.

   Norm: Well, match patterns come from XSLT, so you might expect them to
   work there

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to investigate the functions added by XSLT and draft
   some prose for the spec [recorded in

  Add a limit option to p:count

   Mohamed summarizes.

   Proposed: add a limit option to p:count along the lines Mohamed suggested


  Any other business


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Henry to setup an xproc developers list at w3.org [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action01[9]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Mohamed to propose serialization changes to support C14N.
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action02[10]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to investigate the functions added by XSLT and draft
   some prose for the spec [recorded in
   [End of minutes]


   [1] http://www.w3.org/
   [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/05/29-agenda
   [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-irc
   [6] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [7] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [8] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [9] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [10] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [11] http://www.w3.org/2008/05/29-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
   [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl[12] version 1.133 (CVS
    $Date: 2008/06/04 14:14:44 $

Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2008 14:16:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:46 UTC