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

XProc Minutes: 23/24 Oct 2008 (TPAC '08 f2f)

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:27:43 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2d4h1ow80.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html

[1]W3C

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

23/24 Oct 2008

   [2]Agenda

   See also: IRC logs: [3]23 Oct and [4]24 Oct

Attendees

   Present
           Zarella (PTC), Mohamed, Vojtech, Norm, Alex, Henry

   Chair
           Norm

   Scribe
           Norm

Contents

     * [5]Topics

         1. [6]Accept this agenda?
         2. [7]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. [8]Remaining open last call issues
         4. [9]015: Add p:encrypt/p:decrypt steps
         5. [10]030: LCWD comments from the XQuery WG
         6. [11]035: Another look at validate-with-xml-schema
         7. [12]036: Make 5.7.2 consistent wrt context node
         8. [13]035: Another look at validate-with-xml-schema
         9. [14]037: Self-importing
        10. [15]041: Steps with no inputs/outputs
        11. [16]037: Self-importing
        12. [17]042: Detecting errors
        13. [18]044: Source on p:error
        14. [19]045: split-sequence and position() and last()
        15. [20]046: href on p:store
        16. [21]047: p:wrap-sequence and position()/last()
        17. [22]048: p:log on atomic steps
        18. [23]049: Standard C14N method
        19. [24]Test suite
        20. [25]Reviewing use cases and requirements
        21. [26]CR exit criteria
        22. [27]Default XML Processing Model
        23. [28]Any other business?

     * [29]Summary of Action Items

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

  Accept this agenda?

   -> [30]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-agenda

   Mohamed: Is everyone going to be here this afternoon?

   Norm: The AC meeting is this afternoon, we'll see what happens.
   ... We can rearrange the agenda if necessary.

   Agenda accepted, for the time being.

   Vojtech: What is the default XML processing model?

   Norm: It's the other work item on our charter; in the absence of any
   explicit instructions, what processing should an XML processor perform.
   ... We need to start thinking about that item.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [31]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/02-minutes

   Accepted.

  Remaining open last call issues

  015: Add p:encrypt/p:decrypt steps

   Norm: Following discussions with the XML Security WG, we're not likely to
   have any definitions in time for V1.

   Mohamed: What about having simple steps with parameters?

   Norm: I don't see how that provides any more interoperability than just
   letting implementors do it in their own namespace.

   Proposal: close with no action.

   Accepted.

  030: LCWD comments from the XQuery WG

   Norm: I think these are all ok, but I haven't implemented them yet.

   Alex: Where did we leave off?

   Norm: We just need to be careful that introducing "implementation defined
   namespaces" doesn't leak outside the XQuery step. But I don't think that's
   going to be a problem because we have an XML syntax.

   Alex: Do we need to say something about who wins when they come from both
   places?

   Norm: So if my p:xquery call has a foo: namespace declaration and my
   XQuery implementation predefines the foo: namespace (differently), who
   wins?

   Alex: It seems like the right answer would be, we stuff our things into
   the static context and that overrides what was in the by default.

   Norm: My guess is that the query processor starts and will overwrite
   anything that we put in the static context.

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex/Norm to investigate how this actually works.
   [recorded in [32]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01]

   Mohamed: My thought was about all the validation steps. Is there a static
   context for them too?

   Alex: For schema there isn't.

   Mohamed: All the steps make it clear what is declared in XProc but XQuery
   is starting to make us think differently about it.

   Norm: I don't think any of the other steps have this sort of defaulted
   namespace behavior.

  035: Another look at validate-with-xml-schema

   Norm: I'm perfectly happy with Henry's proposal for lax/strict.
   ... Then Henry goes on to propose some new options: use-schema-location
   and try-namespace.

   Alex: I think use-schema-location is a really good idea.

   Some discussion of whether or not parameters should be passed to the
   schema-validate step.

   Norm: Let's set this one aside until Henry gets here.
   ... The only thing you can't do with extension attributes is compute their
   values dynamically. I don't know how serious that is.

  036: Make 5.7.2 consistent wrt context node

   -> [33]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/diff.html#p.option

   Vojtech: Sometimes it's difficult to detect exactly why an XPath
   expression failed.

   Proposal: Accept the changes.

   Accepted.

   Vojtech: If you define a default binding for p:input and you then refer to
   a variable not-in-scope, what happens?

   Norm: The expression fails.
   ... I think the upshot is that we need to say somewhere general that it's
   an error to refer to varible bindings that are not in scope.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to add a general statement about out-of-scope
   variables. [recorded in
   [34]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02]

   Mohamed: With respect to the binding of p:option, we should say that it's
   as if the binding was to p:empty then in 5.15 we should say what that
   means (empty in 1.0 and undefined in 2.0)

   Norm: Makes sense to me.

   Mohamed: Then maybe we wouldn't have to cut-and-paste that prose
   everywhere

   Norm: Anyone disagree?

   Accepted.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to fix p:empty and p:option as Mohamed suggests.
   [recorded in [35]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03]

  035: Another look at validate-with-xml-schema

   Henry: I chose these two options explicitly because these are the ones
   that you need to get Saxon to do the right thing. The default behavior
   changed between 8.0 and 9.0.
   ... What exactly it means to "try namespaces" is implmeentation defined
   (RDDL, GRDDL, etc.)

   Alex: For Xerces, if you turn off the use-schema-location hints and add a
   catalog, that'll just work.

   Henry: Catalogs should be transparent. They enter the game at the time you
   have a URI that you're trying to dereference.

   Alex: We need to be very clear about what try-namespaces it means.

   Henry: We can point directly into the schema spec for the right paragraph
   and clause.

   Alex: I have a catalog for my schema processor and I need to tell it where
   the catalog is.
   ... I could do it externally, but that would be global in some way.

   Henry: We haven't decided if parameters are a mechanism which people can
   use to extend the option set in implementation specific ways.
   ... I don't think that's what they were intended for.
   ... They were intended to operate in the case where it is in the nature of
   a particular step that it has an open-ended set of options.

   Alex: We have steps that violate that: p:hash and p:xsl-formatter

   Henry: Are we sure we're capable of predicting in advance which steps are
   likely to want parameters? Shouldn't every step have a parameter port?

   Alex: Going back through last call?

   Henry: Right, I've said it, but I agree we don't want to go through last
   call for it.

   Vojtech: We have an explicit error for p:hash

   Alex: Maybe we should make that a general "I didn't like your parameter"
   error.
   ... The only thing I can see parameters for are weird implementation
   features.

   Henry: Don't we really need a way to allow implementations to extend the
   list of options available on the step?

   Alex: Can we do this in V.next

   Henry: Yes, but it will be very disruptive. The p:hash and p:xsl-formatter
   steps will have these parameters when they don't need them anymore.
   ... This would actually have the benefit of packaging things a little
   better.

   Inspection of 3.8

   Henry: It seems to me that extension attributes can be used to pass
   implementation-specific strings, but they are static.

   Vojtech: Why don't we have a way to compute extension attribute values?

   Norm: We decided not to do attribute value templates, and we don't have an
   element syntax for them.

   Does anyone want to add a parameter input port to p:validate-with-schema?

   No.

   Do we want to add the use-location-hints and try-namespaces options ?

   Yes.

   Anyone object?

   Accepted.

   Are we happy with the proposed error?

   yes.

   Alex: Should we have the general error about bad parameters or bad
   parameter values?

   Yes.

   Break

   Reconvene at 14:00

  037: Self-importing

   Norm: I think we should allow it, but may require adding some prose about
   the base URI of the pipeline or library document.

   Accepted.

  041: Steps with no inputs/outputs

   Vojtech: We can import pipelines, not just libraries, but the prose talks
   about libraries.

   Norm: Yes, that's probably just sloppy wording. I'll fix it.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to fix the wording about imports so that it applies
   equally to p:pipelines and p:libraries [recorded in
   [36]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action04]

  037: Self-importing

   Vojtech: Does this include little self-contained compound steps?

   Henry: Yes, this is fine.

   Norm: There's no issue, we can just close this without action.

   Accepted.

  042: Detecting errors

   Norm: I asked if unknown steps were an error, and the consensus was that
   they are not.
   ... I'm satisfied.
   ... I propose we close this with no action.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to change 6.1 so that it's not a static error.
   [recorded in [37]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action05]

   <MoZ> well

   <MoZ> Norm, what does it means for the implementation ?

   It means that it's a dynamic error if you attempt to evaluate it.

   Which we already say

   Does that make sense, MoZ ?

   <MoZ> okidok

  044: Source on p:error

   Norm: I think it should not be primary; Henry agreed. Any objections?

   Vojtech: As long as you can bind something, I'm fine.

   Accepted

  045: split-sequence and position() and last()

   Norm: I was confused because of our changes to tracking position and
   length in for-each and viewport.
   ... I think Mohamed is right and there's no problem.
   ... Proposal: close without action.

   Accepted.

  046: href on p:store

   Norm attempts to explain the situation.

   Norm: I think p:store w/o an href should write the document to the
   location of the base URI of the document being stored.
   ... Though we appear not to actually say that yet.

   Henry: If base URIs are propagated, doesn't that run the risk of blowing
   away the pipeline document.

   Norm: If I have an XSLT step that produces a result document, and I
   p:store that result document, I want it to be written to the right URI.

   Henry: See what we say at the top of section 7. If I feed
   file://important/document into a complex pipeline that has a p:store
   somewhere and I've forgotten to put href on it, we'll overwrite the
   document.
   ... Is that really what we want?

   Norm: We have our own base URI function (because XPath 1.0 didn't)
   ... So you could say:

   <p:store>

   <p:with-option name="href" select="p:base-uri(/)">

   </p:store>

   Henry: There are three options: (1) make it required, (2) give the empty
   string special status, perhaps an error, or (3) give it a default that we
   think does something useful, like /dev/null

   Norm: If I have a p:xslt step that produces a bunch of secondary result
   documents and I want to write them to disk, I'll have to write the complex
   form of p:store in order to save the documents.

   Henry: We could specify that the base URI for absolutization in p:store is
   the base URI of the primary input.

   Alex/Norm: We could add a separate option for store to base-URI?

   Henry: On balance, I think the facts are that you can get what you want
   and anything else puts carelessness at high risk.
   ... But do we call the empty string an error?

   Norm: No, becaues #foo would do the same thing.

   Henry: So I think the consensus is that the href attribute is required.

   Proposal: Make the href attribute required.

   Accepted.

  047: p:wrap-sequence and position()/last()

   Norm: I think Mohamed is right.
   ... Proposal: Make it explicit that position() and last() are available in
   wrap sequence.

   Accepted.

  048: p:log on atomic steps

   Norm: This is a spec exposition bug. We just need to say somewhere that
   p:log can be used on all the atomic steps.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to change 3.3 so that it refers to with-option,
   variable, etc. [recorded in
   [38]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action06]

   Accepted.

  049: Standard C14N method

   Mohamed: I made a proposal and we talked about it and decided not to do
   it.

   Alex: It should be put in the serialization spec, we shouldn't have to do
   it. It's something everyone wants.

   Proposed: Close with no action.

   Mohamed: I did make a request for an example.

   Norm: I'm fine with that.

   <MoZ>
   [39]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Jun/0035.html

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to add an example of C14N [recorded in
   [40]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action07]

  Test suite

   Review of use cases and requirements

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to add our use cases and requirements document to
   the References [recorded in
   [41]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action08]

   Use case 5.10 requires dsig, so we can't do that one.

   Use case 5.11 requires a validator that preserves base URI properties.

   Use case 5.14 requires tagsoup or tidy, so we can't do that one.

   Discussion of content-type on p:load and p:document to satisfiy 5.14

   Mohamed observes that p:data can load non-XML resource, but we have no
   facility for doing that with a computed URI.

   Mohamed: So we need to create another step or somehow extend p:load

   <alexmilowski> well... yes

   Vojtech: You can't use text/plain on p:load because it doesn't provide a
   wrapper.

   <alexmilowski> not even with with-option ?

   Norm: Maybe this is how we decided to use p:http-request for this case...

   <alexmilowski> yeah...

   Mohamed: I want to fetch an xhtml document which is distributed as
   text/html so that I am able to work with it.

   <alexmilowski> you can pass a computed URI with a 'file' scheme

   <alexmilowski> (or whatever)

   <alexmilowski> unescape-markup ...

   <alexmilowski> Besides... ISO-8859-1 is really Windows-1252 according to
   HTML5 ...

   <alexmilowski> ...so, you really want p:data ...

   <alexmilowski> (seriously... you really do...)

   <alexmilowski> In fact... you want a byte sequence base64 encoding so you
   can run their crazy redefinition of character encodings

   You want p:data, but you can't use p:data if you need to construct the URI

   <alexmilowski> If you get a text/html media type...

   <alexmilowski> ...and it has a non-unicode encoding...

   <alexmilowski> do you get base64 ?

   <alexmilowski> (checking spec)

   <alexmilowski> Here's our note:

   <alexmilowski> "Given the above description, any content identified as
   text/html will be base64-encoded in the c:body element, as HTML isn't
   always well-formed XML. A user can attempt to convert such content into
   XML using the p:unescape-markup step."

   <alexmilowski> But:

   <alexmilowski> "is recognized as a non-XML media type whose contents are
   encoded as a sequence of Unicode characters (e.g. it has a character
   parameter or the definition of the media type is such that it requires
   Unicode),"

   <alexmilowski> That says that text/html; charset=UTF-8 should end up as
   characters and not base64

   <alexmilowski> But text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 should be base64

   <alexmilowski> Thus... you might have to look at the 'encoding' attribute
   of 'c:body' to understand whether you have characters or not.

   <alexmilowski> Ugly...

   <alexmilowski> What we need is a media type parameter of 'version'

   This is all very unsatisfying

   <alexmilowski> so p:unescape-markup can use

   <alexmilowski> text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1; version=5.0

   <alexmilowski> Yes

   What are the problems?

   <alexmilowski> text/html isn't what you expect anymore...

   [Many of the HTML references here are to HTML5, much discussed at TPAC
   —ed.]

   1. p:data can load a non-XML resource, but can't do so with a computed URI

   2. p:load takes a computed URI, but can't load non-XML data

   3. p:http-request can take a dynamic URI and can load non-XML data, but
   it's likely to base64 encode the result

   4. And we don't have a way to unescape base64 encoded text

   [Subsequent research will reveal that, yes, we do. —ed.]

   Alex: We separated out the encoding on the result from http-request, but
   we don't seem to be doing this here.
   ...c: data and c:body are slightly out of step in this regard.

   Alex: You might want to choose what to do with data based on its encoding:
   even if it's a mappable encoding, you might want to treat it as data.

   We need to clarify how/what encoding means on c:body when it appears in a
   response.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to clarify encoding on c:body in a
   response--probably by saying that it isn't used [recorded in
   [42]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action10]

   Norm: I think there's consensus that we could make forward progress by
   saying that implementations SHOULD attempt to convert the content of any
   text/* media type into Unicode characters. Implementations MUST present
   text/* media types that use a Unicode encoding into characters.

   Light breaks over Marblehead...the p:unescape-markup step *can* decode
   base64 encoded text.

   Mohamed: We need encoding on c:data

   Alex: That's right because it might or might not be base64 encoded.
   ... In unescape-markup we need to say that there can be an charset
   parameter on the content-type.

   Vojtech: We should remove the charset parameter's default value and say
   that it's only used if it's specified and it overrides the charset on the
   content-type.

   Norm: What have we decided?

   1. Remove the default value from the charset parameter on
   p:unescape-markup

   2. Steps that take a content-type should respect the charset parameter

   3. If you specify a charset on unescape-markup, it overrides the charset
   parameter on the content-encoding

   4. If you don't specify the charset in either place, and the encoding is
   base64, that's a dynamic error

   5. Change p:unescape-markup so that it ignores the charset if the encoding
   isn't specified.

   6. If you want to load a non-XML resource, you're stuck with
   p:http-request

   7. Specifically, it's not a dyanmic error if encoding isn't specified and
   the charset is

   8. Add encoding attribute to c:data

   9. Document that http-request can be used to load non-XML resources

   Add an example that shows that there are a bunch of optoins that don't
   make sense

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to go through the spec again and look at the
   encoding/charset things [recorded in
   [43]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action11]

  Reviewing use cases and requirements

   Henry: With respect to 5.19, we found it useful to have a filter on input,
   so that you can say that the pipeline begins by processing *its* input
   with a filter and then proceeds.
   ... A use case that I had to implement was "here comes a document, it's a
   product-database-related document, there's a key field in this, you need
   to look up this field, if it exists in the database, you add the
   attribute, otherwise, add it to the database.

   (This is with respect to 5.20)

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to check with Erik Bruchez about use case 5.24
   [recorded in [44]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action21]

   Some discussion of the NVDL steps.

   [45]http://lists.dsdl.org/dsdl-comment/2008-09/0048.html

   Some discusssion of versioning. We can ask what XPath version we have, but
   not what XSLT version.

   Alex argues in favor of being able to check versions of XSLT, Schema
   Validation, etc.

   Henry proposes an XML document that lists all the steps and the supported
   versions of each.

   In short: all but a very small number of the use cases are satisfied by
   XProc V1.0

   Henry: Propose that the editor produce a CR draft.

   Accepted.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to produce a CR draft. [recorded in
   [46]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action22]

  CR exit criteria

   Henry: The ideal would be one of two things: one is a very carefully
   annotated issues list that shows we've dealt with all the CR comments and
   we have buyin from everyone reasonable and everyone we don't have buyin is
   unreasonable.
   ... And the other is an implementation report that shows three complete
   implementations of every feature.
   ... The bare minimum is two implementations of every feature.

   Norm: Do we need a timetable?

   Henry: Yes, we're being rechartered, so we should have a plan for getting
   to Rec and it better be before December, 2009.
   ... Aim to publish a CR draft in the middle of November, and set the CR
   period to end on 1 March.

  Default XML Processing Model

   Henry: There are two lines of potential exploration: One is that the XML
   spec itself leaves certain choices to the processor (e.g., external
   parameter entity references are expanded)
   ... And what that means is when you publish an XML document on the web,
   the question is, what are you held to. What is the document that is what
   you published? Or what is the infoset?
   ... The objective question that lurks behind it is, if there are entity
   references defined in an external parameter entity, and your parse doesn't
   retrieve them, are you bound by the statements present in the document
   when they involve unknown entity references.
   ... By the same token, what about XInclude processing.
   ... The infoset spec explicitly declines to answer the question of what is
   an XML document. Nor does the spec.
   ... The other line is this notion of the recursive, compositional
   semantics of XML documents.

   Some discussion of what the default might be...

   Henry: Another approach is, should we be talking about a third component
   to the XML media types. When you fetch a document, you can say, I want the
   0 model, the 1 model, or the 2 model.
   ... Where the 0 model means what the parser gives you, the 1 model gives
   you XInclude, the 2 model gives you XInclude/validation model, etc.
   ... Another model says that you should be able to put a pipeline in a URI.

   Consensus seems to be forming around the idea that the defalut XML
   Processing Model is normal XML parsing (with some constraints like, always
   chase external parameter entities for entity declarations), followed by
   XInclude.

  Any other business?

   Some discussion of the expectation of schema-location hints and what the
   defaults should be for try-namespaces= and use-schema-location=

   There's some desire to have a consistent story around schema-location
   hints and schemas that arrive on the schemas port.

   But it's not clear how implementations can support that.

   Not clear what resolution we came to.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to go through the spec again and look at the
   encoding/charset things [recorded in
   [47]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action11]
   [NEW] ACTION: Alex/Norm to investigate how this actually works. [recorded
   in [48]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to add a general statement about out-of-scope
   variables. [recorded in
   [49]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to add an example of C14N [recorded in
   [50]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to add our use cases and requirements document to the
   References [recorded in
   [51]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to change 3.3 so that it refers to with-option,
   variable, etc. [recorded in
   [52]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to change 6.1 so that it's not a static error.
   [recorded in [53]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to clarify encoding on c:body in a response--probably
   by saying that it isn't used [recorded in
   [54]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action10]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to fix p:empty and p:option as Mohamed suggests.
   [recorded in [55]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to fix the wording about imports so that it applies
   equally to p:pipelines and p:libraries [recorded in
   [56]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to check with Erik Bruchez about use case 5.24
   [recorded in [57]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action21]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to produce a CR draft. [recorded in
   [58]http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action22]


   [End of minutes]

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

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [59]scribe.perl version 1.133 ([60]CVS
    log)
    $Date: 2008/11/12 14:26:11 $

References

   Visible links
   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-irc
   4. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-irc
   5. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#agenda
   6. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item01
   7. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item02
   8. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item03
   9. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item04
  10. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item05
  11. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item06
  12. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item07
  13. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item08
  14. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item09
  15. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item10
  16. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item11
  17. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item12
  18. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item13
  19. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item14
  20. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item15
  21. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item16
  22. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item17
  23. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item18
  24. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item19
  25. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item21
  26. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item22
  27. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item23
  28. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#item24
  29. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  30. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/tpac-agenda
  31. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/02-minutes
  32. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  33. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/diff.html#p.option
  34. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  35. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03
  36. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action04
  37. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action05
  38. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action06
  39. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Jun/0035.html
  40. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action07
  41. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action08
  42. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action10
  43. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action11
  44. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action21
  45. http://lists.dsdl.org/dsdl-comment/2008-09/0048.html
  46. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action22
  47. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action11
  48. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  49. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  50. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action07
  51. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action08
  52. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action06
  53. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action05
  54. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action10
  55. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03
  56. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/23-xproc-minutes.html#action04
  57. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  58. http://www.w3.org/2008/10/24-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  59. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  60. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2008 14:28:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 November 2008 14:28:27 GMT