W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > July 2010

XProc Minutes 1 July 2010

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:37:56 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2d3v7tdpn.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minute


                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

Meeting 176, 01 Jul 2010


   See also: [3]IRC log


           Norm, Henry, Vojtech, Paul

           Mohamed, Alex




     * [4]Topics

         1. [5]Accept this agenda?
         2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. [7]Next meeting: telcon, 8 July 2010?
         4. [8]XProc Errata
         5. [9]Editor's draft of XML Processor Profiles
         6. [10]Any other business

     * [11]Summary of Action Items


  Accept this agenda?

   -> [12]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda


  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [13]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/06/24-minutes


  Next meeting: telcon, 8 July 2010?

   Paul and Vojtech give regrets

  XProc Errata

   -> [14]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-proposed-errata

   Norm: Anyone have any questions or comments about E01 and/or E02?
   ... Hearing none, I propose that we accept them.


   Some discussion of what to do next; updating the errata document is the

   <scribe> ACTION: Norm to construct an update to the errata document
   pointed to from the spec and pass it off to someone who can update it.
   [recorded in [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01]

   Norm: Vojtech, you had a question about namespace bindings.

   Vojtech: Yes, in 5.7.5, in the first list, there are rules about how to
   construct namespace bindings.
   ... The way I understand it now, if an XPath expression returns a sequence
   of nodes, then we use the in-scope namespace bindings off the first node
   if the expression returns a node set.

   Norm: I think that exists so that if an expression selects a QName in
   content, the right namespace bindings are carried forward.

   General agreement that everything is ok.

  Editor's draft of XML Processor Profiles

   -> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles

   Some discussion of Paul's comment


   Henry: I think this would be clearer if we changed "conformant processor"
   to "conformant XProc processor" in that sentence.

   Paul: I think that could be clearer.
   ... I'm happy to leave the improvements to the editor.

   Norm: Paul also asks about a profile that's smaller than "minimum". I
   don't feel strongly about the names.
   ... How about "minimum", "basic", "modest", and "recommended"

   Paul: That sounds good.

   Norm: Anyone have concerns about these names?

   None heard.

   Norm: Paul's last comment is mostly editorial, but I agree.

   General agreement that it should read "reading and processing" as Paul

   Henry: Perhaps I should report on my action to add something about
   ... I've started. Looking over the XML Spec again, it's not going to be as
   nice as I'd like.
   ... The best I can do for the first two profiles (which don't read any
   external markup) is to say things in two parts.
   ... For documents which are, or should be, standalone=yes and for
   documents which are standalone=no
   ... Because for documents which are standalone=no, if you don't read the
   external subset there isn't much you can say.
   ... You aren't gauranteed to get much at all.
   ... The most you can say is that you'll get the document element name and
   attributes (provided they don't contain entity references)
   ... But almost no one bothers with standalone="yes" and the default is
   standalone="no", so it'll be tricky to get right.
   ... Especially since processors aren't required to report unexpanded
   ... But the other two are easier and I think we can get somewhere with
   ... The scope for variation is reduced after the external subset has been
   read and processed.

   Norm summarizes the state of the issues list, not much progress to be made

  Any other business


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Norm to construct an update to the errata document pointed
   to from the spec and pass it off to someone who can update it. [recorded
   in [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01]

   [End of minutes]


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([20]CVS
    $Date: 2010/07/01 15:37:05 $


   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-irc
   4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#agenda
   5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item01
   6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item02
   7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item03
   8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item04
   9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item05
  10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item06
  11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#ActionSummary
  12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda
  13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/06/24-minutes
  14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-proposed-errata
  15. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles
  17. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2010Jun/0026.html
  18. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  19. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  20. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 15:38:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:48 UTC