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

XProc Minutes 27 May 2010

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 12:11:15 -0400
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m239xd8gv0.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes


                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

Meeting 172, 27 May 2010


   See also: [3]IRC log


           Norm, Vojtech, Alex, Henry

           Paul, Mohamed




     * [4]Topics

         1. [5]Accept this agenda?
         2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
         3. [7]Next meeting: telcon, 3 June 2010?
         4. [8]Administrivia
         5. [9]Review comments on XML processor profiles
         6. [10]Comment 1, white space handling
         7. [11]Comment 2, XSLT media type
         8. [12]Comment 3, XML Base processing
         9. [13]Any other business?

     * [14]Summary of Action Items


  Accept this agenda?

   -> [15]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-agenda


  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/04/15-minutes


  Next meeting: telcon, 3 June 2010?

   Paul gives regrets for 3 June


   Yay us! XProc is a W3C Recommendation!

  Review comments on XML processor profiles

   -> [17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/wd-comments/

  Comment 1, white space handling

   Norm: I'm inclined to agree with David that it would be nice, but I'm not
   sure what we can say.

   Henry: Yes, there's a constant grumbling about whitespace
   ... Can a non-validating but doctype reading processor notice what
   elements have element only content and ignore whitespace?

   Norm: No, I don't think that's conformant.
   ... From 2.10 in the XML Rec: An XML processor MUST always pass all
   characters in a document that are not markup through to the application.
   ... As far as I can tell, we don't give any processor any leeway to
   discard whitespace.

   <ht> [18]http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-white-space

   Henry: Is it conformant to the XML specification for a non-validating
   processor to report element-content-whitespace? I see nothing that forbids

   Alex: So does Saxon throw away element content whitespace?

   Norm: Yes, I think it does if you perform DTD validation. But that's not
   the XProc default and it only applies to DTD validation.
   ... I'm not sure what we can do to help.

   Henry: A significant goal of our spec is to improve interoperability.
   David points out that we don't say.

   Norm: Is a minimal processor or a basic processor allowed to do DTD

   Henry: We haven't answered that question.
   ... Another version of the question is: does the result of processing with
   a basic processor include attribute type information?
   ... Do we really want to sign up to what I said before about interoperable
   infoset or are we just setting a lower bound.
   ... So we could say what properties you will get, but you might get more.
   That's a generalization of the question.

   Norm: So my intuition is to say that you can't do validation.

   Henry: But the XML spec doesn't classify processors tightly enough for us
   to do that.

   Norm: True, and the whole point about reading external declarations is so
   that we get some attribute types.

   Vojtech: If we follow Henry's idea of only specifying a lower bound, then
   aren't we done?

   Some rambling discussion of the issues

   Henry: If we want to answer the question, we will have to be much more
   careful about what is conveyed. This will require a careful reading of the
   XML spec.
   ... We'll have to take a stand on every optional feature for
   non-validating parsers in the XML spec.
   ... The two we've thought of so far are element content whitespace and
   attribute types.

   Norm expresses concern about what parser implementors will do if we
   attempt to specify specific answers to a bunch of detailed questions.

   Alex: What happens with web browsers today?

   Alex volunteers to look at what Webkit does

   <scribe> ACTION: Alex to investigate what Webkit does [recorded in

   <scribe> ACTION: Henry to ask Richard what rxp does [recorded in

  Comment 2, XSLT media type

   Henry: I read the definition of the element-content-whitespace property in
   the Infoset spec as being very carefully worded to allow the possibility
   that this property could be set through a process other than validation.

   Norm: I'm happy to fix this in our example. Lots of folks use text/xsl,
   but application/xslt+xml is what's registered.

   Alex: Yes.

   Norm: Objections?

   None heard.

   <scribe> ACTION: Henry to change text/xsl in the spec. [recorded in

  Comment 3, XML Base processing

   Alex: I'm not sure I understand what the objection is.

   Henry: I think all we need to say is that we don't mean anything more than
   XML Base, but that by depending on our profiles, you must use XML base.
   You could get the same effect by saying you conform to XML Base, but you
   don't have to.

   Alex: It's a layer cake, I think all we're missing is a refernece to the

   Henry: I think we made an intentional decision not to put square brackets
   around base URI.
   ... the XML base spec does not refer to the infoset spec. It doesn't put
   square brackets around the phrase base URI.
   ... And that's why we quite consciously didn't introduce a reference to
   infoset here.
   ... I think we just need a terminology section like XML Base that says
   what we mean by "base URI"

   Norm: That seems reasonable; let's do that and see if it satisfies the

   <scribe> ACTION: Henry to propose the addition of a terminology section
   and reply to the commenter. [recorded in

  Any other business?

   None heard.


Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Alex to investigate what Webkit does [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Henry to ask Richard what rxp does [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Henry to change text/xsl in the spec. [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Henry to propose the addition of a terminology section and
   reply to the commenter. [recorded in

   [End of minutes]


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [27]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([28]CVS
    $Date: 2010/05/27 16:10:31 $


   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-irc
   4. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#agenda
   5. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item01
   6. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item02
   7. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item03
   8. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item04
   9. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item05
  10. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item06
  11. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item07
  12. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item08
  13. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#item09
  14. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/27-agenda
  16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/04/15-minutes
  17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/05/wd-comments/
  18. http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-white-space
  19. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  20. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  21. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action03
  22. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action04
  23. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action01
  24. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action02
  25. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action03
  26. http://www.w3.org/2010/05/27-xproc-minutes.html#action04
  27. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  28. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 27 May 2010 16:11:51 UTC

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