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

XProc Minutes 6 Mar 2008

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 09:57:56 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m21w66oly3.fsf@nwalsh.com>
W3C[1]

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

06 Mar 2008

   Agenda[2]

   See also: IRC log[3]

Attendees

   Present
           Norm, Rui, Mohamed, Alex, Paul, Richard, Murray, Andrew,
           Michael[xx:20-]

   Regrets

   Chair
           Norm

   Scribe
           Norm

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Accept this agenda?
         2. Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. Next meeting: telcon 13 March 2008?
         4. Last call comments
         5. 58. Scope of options
         6. #83 Handling of system IDs
         7. #119 (editorial) p:directory-list
         8. #124 p:log feels clunky
         9. #125 The 'href' attribute
        10. Comment #126 p:pipeline name attribute
        11. #109 Response headers in p:http-request
        12. Any other business?
     * Summary of Action Items

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

  Accept this agenda?

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/03/06-agenda

   Accepted.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/02/14-minutes

   Accepted.

  Next meeting: telcon 13 March 2008?

   Mohamed gives probably regrets, perhaps until our respective daylight
   savings times align

   Andrew gives regrets for next week

  Last call comments

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments.html

  58. Scope of options

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments#C058

   ->
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Feb/0066.html

   Norm attempts to summarize his message 66.

   Richard: So options obscure inherited options immediately.

   Norm: Yes.

   Richard: How is this like XSLT?

   Norm: The solution I conclude with in message 66 is the same.
   ... Anyone think more time on the list will help?

   Mohamed: No, I don't think so.

   Richard: There are three different situations in which you use p:option:
   ... 1. When calling an atomic step
   ... 2. When declaring an atomic step
   ... 3. In a compound step where it counts as both.

   Norm: Yes.

   Richard: In the calling of an atomic step, does it bind it in there as
   well? If you bind 'a' on atomic step, does that get used immediately.

   Norm: No. That's the subtle distinction, options in atomic steps aren't
   declarations.

   Richard: Right. So that's the expected behavior. I think that sounds like
   the best we can do.

   Norm: Anyone else?

   Alex: Could we just start over?

   Some discussion of getting rid of the current parameter mechanism and
   using p:param and p:with-param here.

   Richard: The case of options on a subpipeline, that's more like variable
   than parameters.
   ... We're left with option on an atomic step decl is like xsl:param,
   option on an atomic step is like xsl:with-param, and option on a compound
   step is like xsl:variable

   Norm: Yes, I think so.
   ... There's a sense in which I'd like to add p:variable, but I'm
   reluctant.

   The analogy in XSLT would be:

   <xsl:param name="match" select="'MATCHSTUFF'"/>

   <xsl:call-template name="...">

   <xsl:with-param name="match" select="'//a[@foo]'"/>

   <xsl:with-param name="attribute-value" select="$match"/>

   </xsl:call-template>

   <PGrosso> ac

   Richard: Renaming the things is something we can do or not do regardless
   of how we decide the scoping quesiton.
   ... We should do this now and deal with renaming later.
   ... I agree with Michael in principle that it would be easier if we
   renamed things.

   Michael: Why do we not have a single name proposed for all instances of
   calling things?

   Norm: We have the design we arrived at by consensus :-)

   Richard/Michael discuss how this is related to ALGOL and Lisp

   Proposed: we finesse the problem and say that the options that are in
   scope are all of those *declared* by preceding-siblings or *declared* by
   ancestors.

   Michael: I like that, and I'd like to call 1 and 3 option and 2
   with-option.

   Richard: I think what I'd like is to rename options to parameters, so we
   have param, with-param and variable and the things we currently call
   parameters we call something else.

   Norm: Absent a proposal that replaces our current parameter mechanism, I
   don't think that's practical.

   Michael: Our existing parameters are things we hand off to black boxes.
   Right?

   Norm: yes.

   Michael: They are the name/value pairs I give to XSLT ot initialize
   xsl:params at the top-most level of the stylesheet.
   ... I don't know how this relates to one stylesheet calling another.
   ... I'd be happy to use with-param for all of them

   Norm: We have options and parameters and we need to keep those two bags
   separate

   Some discussion of options and paramters and namespaces and lions and
   tigers and bears

   <MSM> my firefox has decided to launch a background process; i've got to
   kill it

   Richard: Is it productive to continue talking about this here? If someone
   can come up with a better ansewr, I'd be delighted, but I doubt it's going
   to happen in the next 20 minutes.

   Proposed: we finesse the problem and say that the options that are in
   scope are all of those *declared* by preceding-siblings or *declared* by
   ancestors.

   Accepted.

   <MSM> so they are unprefixed in practice, but qualified in theory --
   analogy to the QT function namespace

  #83 Handling of system IDs

   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments#C083

   ->
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Feb/0022.html

   Norm: We really need to work this one out. I'm not sure we can do it in 20
   minutes, though...
   ... Perhaps someone would take an action to come back with a proposal.

   Richard proposes Henry.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to try to get Henry to tell us the right answer.
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01[11]]

  #119 (editorial) p:directory-list

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to fix p:directory-list [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02[12]]

  #124 p:log feels clunky

   http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments#C124[13]

   Norm: I'm not inclined to go there, it requires solving the mixing several
   streams of XML into a single document problem.

   Proposed: Reject.

   Accepted.

  #125 The 'href' attribute

   Norm: The commenter wonders why we call things that aren't hypertext
   references "href". The answer is precedent. So why not on xsl-formatter?

   Richard: I don't think href is used for places that you're going to write
   *to*

   Norm: Anyone feel strongly that we should resolve this inconsistency?

   <MSM> Norm (and MSM, silently): yes, it is, at least for XSLT 2.0 result
   documents.

   Alex: Is this really inconsistent?

   Mohamed: I think we should use href everywhere.

   Alex: I agree.

   Proposed: Rename uri on p:xsl-formatter to href

   Accepted.

  Comment #126 p:pipeline name attribute

   Norm isn't sure he understands the question

   Richard: We did talk about this before, if you wanted to name it for some
   purpose other than calling it, you might want to give it a name.

   Mohamed: You could use the p:declare-step form if you wanted to name it,
   right?

   Norm: yes
   ... I'm not sure if that means we should allow a name on p:pipeline or
   not.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to point out p:declare-step to the commenter and see
   if they're satisfied. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action03[14]]

  #109 Response headers in p:http-request

   Norm: Alex, this is on your radar?

   Alex: I already have an action to fix this.
   ... There's nothing to do there accept remove the content-type
   restriction.

   Norm: Ok, reply to the message when you check in the changes.

  Any other business?

   None. Adjourned.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to investigate parameters to sha1 for p:hash
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action04[15]]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to fix p:directory-list [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02[16]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to investigate parameters to sha1 for p:hash [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action04[17]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to point out p:declare-step to the commenter and see if
   they're satisfied. [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action03[18]]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to try to get Henry to tell us the right answer.
   [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01[19]]
    
   [End of minutes]

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

   [1] http://www.w3.org/
   [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/03/06-agenda
   [3] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-irc
   [11] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [12] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [13] http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments#C124
   [14] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [15] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action04
   [16] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02
   [17] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action04
   [18] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action03
   [19] http://www.w3.org/2008/03/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01
   [20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
   [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl[20] version 1.133 (CVS
    log[21])
    $Date: 2008/03/19 13:56:55 $

Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2008 13:58:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 19 March 2008 13:58:48 GMT