- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 13:07:59 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m263hdah74.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
Meeting 139, 09 Apr 2009
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Norm, Richard, Paul, Vojtech
Regrets
Henry, Mohamed
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 16 Apr 2009?
4. [8]#126 Request from TAG: Status of work on default processing
model
5. [9]#100/#101 Section 5.11, the inherited environment, and
input/output ports.
6. [10]#104 validate-with-xml-schema - multiple schemas provided
7. [11]#105 p:xquery and c:data
8. [12]#106 p:exec - path separators
9. [13]#107 p:exec - multiple source documents
10. [14]Any other business?
* [15]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept this agenda?
-> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-agenda
Accepted.
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/03/19-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting: telcon 16 Apr 2009?
No regrets heard.
#126 Request from TAG: Status of work on default processing model
Paul: Are we still planning to try to address that?
Norm: I think I'd like us to take a look at it
Richard: Is the TAG responsible for overlapping things?
Norm: I think the TAG is looking at some related issues, but they probably
hope we'll provide some guidance.
Richard: The description in the charter is pretty vague, perhaps we could
get more specifics?
Norm: Yes. Indeed.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm/Henry to attempt to provide a more crisp description
of what's needed as a first step towards getting to this work. [recorded
in [18]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
Richard: Use cases would be a good place to start. I've long imagined that
one such use case is to answer the question "what does a web browser do
with an XML document"
Norm: I'll work this into the agenda more regularly so that we can track
our progress.
#100/#101 Section 5.11, the inherited environment, and input/output ports.
Norm attempts to summarize.
Norm: I think the answer, whether the prose is clear or not, is that steps
can't see their own inputs and outputs. The question of 5.11 is an
attempt, I think to address the special case of p:output on a compound
step.
Richard: The outputs of a compound step are surely in the same state as
the other step children of a subpipeline?
Vojtech: I thought that in 5.11 the phrase "In all cases except the
p:output of a compound step" was redundant.
... When I read it, I went looking to see what was so special, but in fact
I think it's covered by the other definitions. It isn't special.
Norm: Fair enough, I'm happy to remove the phrase if it causes more
confusion than clarity.
Vojtech: Unless I missed something, I wasn't sure.
Further discussion of 2.5
Norm: In 100, the magic phrase from 2.5 is "the container's contained
steps". Compound steps see their siblings, but not themselves.
Vojtech: I have a compound step. It sees the output ports of its contained
steps. Suppose one of the contained steps is a compound step.
... Now inside that compound step, this step inherites the visibility of
the output ports from its parent, which means that it sees it's output
port.
Richard: No, it sees the output ports of its siblings, not its parent.
Norm: I think that second bullet in 2.5 needs to clarify that it doesn't
apply to the contained step itself.
... To fix issue 100, we need to say "The union of all the declared
outputs of all of the containers's contained steps *except this step* are
added to the readable ports." But in better English.
Agreed.
Norm: Coming back to 101, I now think that prose is correct. It wouldn't
be allowed according to the rules and rather than rewrite the rules to
allow it, we're simply stating an exception.
Agreed.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to fix the rules in 2.5 to satisfy CR #100. CR #101
can be closed without action. [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
#104 validate-with-xml-schema - multiple schemas provided
Vojtech: If you have the validate with XML Schema step and you pass
multiple schemas, what does that mean.
Norm attempts to describe the schema validation rules of XSD.
Vojtech: And what about xs:include and xs:import.
Norm: I propose we wait for Henry's input.
#105 p:xquery and c:data
Vojtech explains.
Norm: It boils down to whether the 3rd or 4th bullet in 7.2.9 applies. I
don't think it much matters.
Vojtech: I think we should say that it's c:data without a content-type or
with a content-type that specifies a text content type...something like
that.
Norm: That works for me.
... Proposed: make the change that Vojtech outlines.
Accepted.
#106 p:exec - path separators
Norm: My proposal is that "you lose" if you get mixtures of slashes and
you turn on fix-slashes.
Vojtech: So you lose if you need a mixture fo forward and backward slashes
in the filename
Norm: Only if you turn on the fix-slashes option.
... It seems like we have two choices, leave it as is or invent a new
escaping mechanism.
Richard: We could use a private use character or allow the fix-slashes
option to specify which character to replace with the platform-specific
slash.
Norm: We've made pretty significant changes to p:exec already.
Richard: I think I'd say that no-translation is applied unless you specify
the fixup and then that fixup is applied everywhere.
Vojtech: It sounds good to me.
Norm: How about I write up a proposal that does this and we see if we like
it.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to write this up as a proposal. [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action03]
#107 p:exec - multiple source documents
Vojtech: What do multiple source documents mean? Is it only to allow no
documents?
Norm: Yes, I think it probably was.
Vojtech: So what happens if you pass two, is it an error?
Norm: I think we should either say that its an error or say that its
implementation-defined.
... Do you have any command-line tools that accept a sequence of documents
on stdin?
Richard: No, I don't think so.
Norm: I propose we make it an error in V1 to pass a sequence of more than
one document.
Accepted.
Any other business?
None heard.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to fix the rules in 2.5 to satisfy CR #100. CR #101 can
be closed without action. [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to write this up as a proposal. [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Norm/Henry to attempt to provide a more crisp description of
what's needed as a first step towards getting to this work. [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([25]CVS
log)
$Date: 2009/04/09 17:07:02 $
References
Visible links
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item06
11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item07
12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item08
13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item09
14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#item10
15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-minutes.html#ActionSummary
16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/04/09-agenda
17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/03/19-minutes
18. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action01
19. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action02
20. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action03
21. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action02
22. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action03
23. http://www.w3.org/2009/04/09-xproc-minutes.html#action01
24. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
25. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2009 17:08:50 UTC