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

XProc Minutes 20 Nov 2008

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:36:00 -0500
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m27i6ys3jz.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes

[1]W3C

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

Meeting 130, 20 Nov 2008

   [2]Agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

Attendees

   Present
           Norm, Mohamed, Alex, Paul, Henry, Richard

   Regrets
           Michael

   Chair
           Norm

   Scribe
           Norm

Contents

     * [4]Topics

         1. [5]Accept this agenda?
         2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. [7]Next meeting: telcon 4 Dec 2008?
         4. [8]Fixing static context before CR
         5. [9]Fixing p:wrap match="/"
         6. [10]Allow extension steps to use c: namespace
         7. [11]Any other comments on the CR draft.
         8. [12]Any other business?

     * [13]Summary of Action Items

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

  Accept this agenda?

   -> [14]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda

   Accepted.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [15]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/13-minutes

   Accepted.

  Next meeting: telcon 4 Dec 2008?

   Skipping 27 Nov, US Thanksgiving.

   No regrets heard.

  Fixing static context before CR

   ->
   [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Nov/0098.html

   Norm explains the situation and proposes to strike "or made available
   through p:namespaces"

   Accepted.

  Fixing p:wrap match="/"

   Norm explains that it's only about user convenience.

   Henry suggests that since XSLT 2.0 allows something similar, we should
   too.

   Alex: I agree with Henry

   Norm: If you match /, you get all the nodes in the document.

   Mohamed: Is it the only place where we should do this?

   Norm: After a quick check, I don't see any others that make any sense.

   Proposal: Make the change.

   Mohamed: What about www-form-url-encode.

   Norm: Well...www-form-url-encode does allow match=/, but will invariably
   produce a dynamic error if you do that.

   Accepted.

  Allow extension steps to use c: namespace

   See: [17]http://exproc.org/proposed/steps/

   Norm: I think we should allow people to reuse the c: namespace.

   Alex: I wouldn't want to restrict what people can produce from their
   steps.

   Mohamed: We have three namespaces, on two of them we explicitly don't want
   people to reuse them.

   Richard: What about in inline documents?

   Norm: We're pretty clear that content in an inline is just content and we
   don't care what it is.

   Mohamed: If we used the c: namespace and we use an element that's already
   been defined in this specification, can we add an attribute to it?

   Henry: I think we should just say that common sense suggests that such
   usages shouldn't overlap with the uses defined in this spec. unless the
   usage is identical.

   Alex: I'm with Henry.

   Mohamed: Today we don't mandate that if you extend the output of an
   existing step, you must use an extension attribute. So you could put a
   @type on c:result and that might effect interoperability.

   Norm: This is a bigger can of worms than I thought, perhaps we shouldn't
   say anything.
   ... If we do this later, does it push us back in the process?

   Henry: No, how could it effect the conformance of an implementation. This
   isn't a big deal.

   <richard> X crashed :-(

   Norm: So do we want to try to nail this down today, or come back to it
   later.

   Henry: I'm fine to come back later

   Mohamed: Me too.

   Norm: Ok, we'll leave this.

  Any other comments on the CR draft.

   -> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/CR-xproc-20081126/

   Norm: Any comments?

   Mohamed: Congratulations!

   Norm: Congrats to us all.

  Any other business?

   Mohamed: What's the future work?

   Norm: We need to get the test suite finished, we need to encourage
   implementors, and we need to turn our attention to the default XML
   processing model.

   Adjourned.

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

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

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.133 ([20]CVS
    log)
    $Date: 2008/11/20 17:35:17 $

References

   Visible links
   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-xproc-irc
   4. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#agenda
   5. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item01
   6. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item02
   7. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item03
   8. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item04
   9. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item05
  10. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item06
  11. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item07
  12. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item08
  13. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda
  15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/13-minutes
  16. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Nov/0098.html
  17. http://exproc.org/proposed/steps/
  18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/CR-xproc-20081126/
  19. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  20. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 20 November 2008 17:36:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 20 November 2008 17:36:43 GMT