W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > August 2009

XProc Minutes 6 Aug 2009

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:59:21 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2d479aq7a.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes

[1]W3C

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

06 Aug 2009

   [2]Agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

Attendees

   Present
           Norm, Paul, Vojtech, Henry, Alex

   Regrets

   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 20 Aug 2009
         4. [8]155 Circular and re-entrant libraries
         5. [9]148 Parameter names cannot be in the XProc namespace
         6. [10]149 UUID
         7. [11]150 err:XD0002 and err:XD0011 and err:XD0029
         8. [12]151: Why is err:XC0001 a step error?
         9. [13]152: p:http-request and err:XC0020
        10. [14]156: What nodes does replace act on?
        11. [15]Any other business?

     * [16]Summary of Action Items

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

  Accept this agenda?

   -> [17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-agenda

   Accepted.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/30-minutes

   Accepted.

  Next meeting: telcon 20 Aug 2009

   Cancelling 13 Aug for Balisage

   Henry gives regrets for 20 Aug, 27 Aug

  155 Circular and re-entrant libraries

   Basically, what we've got doesn't work. Henry has made an alternate
   proposal.

   ->
   [19]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2009Aug/att-0000/import_algorithm.html

   Vojtech: I think there's still an issue with nested pipelines.

   Henry: I think there is a problem...but not with nested pipelines.
   ... I don't think nested pipelines are a problem because the algorithm
   stops when it hits a p:pipeline child.
   ... Consider a pipeline that has an import and a nested pipeline (as a
   sibling of import)
   ... And that nested pipeline defines symbols (nested pipelines or an
   import of its own).

   <ht> [pipe <import a> [pipe <import b>][pipe <import c>]]

   Scribe struggles

   Henry: The problem is that the algorithm as I specified it doesn't check
   the nested pipelines.
   ... I think I know how to fix that without changing the algorithm, but we
   need a different set of initial conditions.
   ... To check a pipeline, you need to know the exports of its parent and
   the URIs that were involved in checking that and you start with those.
   ... I'll send another message in a little while with an update.

   Vojtech: I'm happier with the new proposal, including Henry's addendum. I
   think it's easier to understand.

   Norm: Yes, I think so to.
   ... Ok, we'll continue the review in email and touch base again at the
   next telcon.

  148 Parameter names cannot be in the XProc namespace

   Vojtech: For options and variables, the spec says they can't be in the
   XProc namespace. It says the same thing about paramters.
   ... But I don't think it can be a *static* error for parameters.

   Norm: Right. It's clearly not a static error.

   Vojtech: Is it really necessary to say this about parameters?

   Norm: We own it, that's why we say it, but I don't feel strongly about it.
   ... Would anyone ever need to write a stylesheet that used parameters in
   the XProc namespace?
   ... I can't think of a reason. I'm inclined to leave the prohibition but
   make the parameter case dynamic.

   Vojtech: But leave options and variables static?

   Norm: Yes.

   Propsal: Keep the prohibition, create a new dynamic error for the
   parameters case.

   Accepted.

  149 UUID

   Norm: I think this is editorial.

   Alex: I can dig up a normative reference and send it to you.

   Norm: Thanks!

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to find a normative reference for UUID algorithms.
   [recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01]

   <alexmilowski> Odd: Here's the official spec for UUIDs:
   [21]http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.667-200808-I/en

  150 err:XD0002 and err:XD0011 and err:XD0029

   Norm: Yes, it seems odd to have all three. We could lose 2 or 11 and 29 I
   think.
   ... I guess losing 2 is the way to go, it's in a part of the spec distant
   from the other constraints on p:document and p:data.

   Vojtech: I would remove 2.

   Proposal: Remove err:XD0002 in favor of the two more specific errors, 11
   and 29.

   Accepted.

  151: Why is err:XC0001 a step error?

   Vojtech explains why they should both be dynamic errors.

   Norm: I think you're right.

   Proposal: Rename err:XC0001 to some appropriate dynamic error number

   Norm: Actually, I think err:XC0001 is simply subsumed by err:XD0020.
   There's no need to call out method if we aren't going to call out all of
   them.

   Vojtech: Do we need two: one for invalid values and one for unsupported
   values?

   Norm: I don't know, I'm not sure users will get value out of that
   distinction.

   Vojtech: When I was writing the serialization tests, I had problems
   telling them apart.

   Norm: Sold!

   Proposal: Remove err:XC0001 using err:XD0020 there instead.

   Accepted.

  152: p:http-request and err:XC0020

   Alex: In both cases, it's about making sure the values are consistent.

   Norm: Does anyone diagree that those are two cases of the same error, that
   is that one error code is sufficient.

   Vojtech: The first definition talks specifically about the header value.

   Alex: The spirit of this error is that to make a request, you have to get
   all the packaging right: headers, options, etc. have to match.
   ... The first mention talks about headers, but the boundry and a few other
   things also come into play.

   Norm: I'm happy to reword err:XC0020 so that it's clear that what we're
   testing is general consistency in a request.

   Proposal: Generalize err:XC0020 so that it's more appropriate for both
   cases.

   Accepted.

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to generalize err:XC0020 appropriately. [recorded in
   [22]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02]

  156: What nodes does replace act on?

   Vojtech: The replace step talks about the "elements" that it matches, but
   later on it talks about comments, PIs, text, etc.
   ... I think it should talk about nodes instead of elements.

   Norm: Sounds right to me.

   Proposal: Replace elements with nodes where appropropriate to make the
   description accurately reflect what the step does.

   Accepted.

  Any other business?

   Norm: We're getting very close to being done. Maybe September? I'll have a
   more coherent report of coverage by the next meeting.

   No other business heard.

   Alex: Who's going to Balisage?

   Norm: I think it's you and I and Mohamed.

   Adjourned.

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to find a normative reference for UUID algorithms.
   [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to generalize err:XC0020 appropriately. [recorded in
   [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02]

   [End of minutes]

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

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [25]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([26]CVS
    log)
    $Date: 2009/08/06 15:58:30 $

References

   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-irc
   4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#agenda
   5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item01
   6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item02
   7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item03
   8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item04
   9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item05
  10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item06
  11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item07
  12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item08
  13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item09
  14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item10
  15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#item11
  16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-minutes#ActionSummary
  17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-agenda
  18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/30-minutes
  19. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2009Aug/att-0000/import_algorithm.html
  20. http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  21. http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.667-200808-I/en
  22. http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  23. http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  24. http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  25. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  26. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 16:00:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 6 August 2009 16:00:19 GMT