XML Query/XSL WG Joint Teleconference #638 Minutes 2016-04-05

"Liam R. E. Quin" <liam@w3.org> writes:
> DRAFT XML Query/XSL WG Joint Teleconference #638 Minutes 2016-04-05
>
> SUMMARY OF DECISIONS
> ====================
> Note to secretary: Please insert a summary of all decisions made during 
> this teleconference at this location in the minutes.
>
> Decisions MUST be clear as to their complete intent.  The subject of the 
> decision should *not* require dereferencing; it is most helpful if 
> agenda numbers and bug numbers are accompanied by their titles.  If a 
> decision is recorded about the resolution of a bug, the decision must 
> state exactly what the resolution is (e.g., "Accept the solution in 
> comment #5", or "Replace the production for XXX with this: <new 
> production>", or the like.  It should be possible to read a decision 
> months later and be certain what it meant and whether or not it was 
> properly applied.
>
> NEW ACTION ITEMS
> ================
> Note to secretary: Please insert all new action items assigned during 
> this teleconference at this location in the minutes.
>
> Action items MUST make sense even when they are viewed standalone (that 
> is, not read in the context of the agenda item where they were 
> assigned).  This explicitly requires that all referents (e.g., "this", 
> "that") be made clear.  Action items such as "Ralph to resolve this 
> problem" are DISALLOWED.  It takes a scribe only a few additional 
> minutes to ensure that action items are clear, while it takes the entire 
> WG considerable effort to constantly research the meaning of unclear 
> action items.  The subject of the action item should *not* require 
> dereferencing; it is most helpful if agenda numbers and bug numbers are 
> accompanied by their titles.
>
> ===================================================
> Joint XML Query Working Group and XSL Working Group
> ===================================================
>
> J1. Administrative Items
>
> J1.1 Selection of secretary(s)

Chair: Liam
Scribe: Norm
Present: Liam, Norm, Abel, Michael Kay, Michael Sperberg-McQueen, Josh,
         Jonathan, O’Neil, Tim

> Most recent secretaries (least-recent participants first):
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> (This list identifies the most recent three occasions when each 
> participant acted as Secretary for the Task Force.  The person whose 
> name is at the top of the list should plan to take the minutes at the 
> meeting identified by this agenda; if that person is unavailable, then 
> the job will fall to the next person on the list, etc.
>
> Jonathan Robie      - 2016-01-05, 2015-09-29, 2015-05-12
> John Snelson        - 2015-01-12, 2015-07-16, 2015-06-02
> Liam Quin           - 2016-01-19, 2015-10-06, 2015-06-16
> Adam Retter         - 2015-01-26, 2015-10-20, 2015-04-21
> O'Neil Delpratt     - 2016-02-02, 2015-10-27, 2015-06-23
> Michael Sprbrg-McQn - 2016-02-09, 2015-10-03, 2015-06-09
> Mike Kay            - 2016-03-01, 2015-11-10, 2015-07-15
> Michael Dyck        - 2016-03-08, 2015-11-17, 2015-09-01
> Josh Spiegel        - 2016-03-15, 2015-12-01, 2015-09-08
> Tim Mills           - 2016-03-22, 2015-12-08, 2015-09-15
> Norman Walsh        - 2016-04-05, 2015-12-15, 2015-09-22
>
> J1.2 Call the Roll -- NOT DONE DURING TELECONFERENCE
>
> Note to secretary: During the meeting, take a note of the Webex  
> participants, then list in the minutes those present and those who sent 
> regrets.  All others will be presumed to have been absent without regrets.
>
> XML Query WG membership list: 
> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=18797&order=org
>
> XSL WG membership list: 
> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=19552&order=org
>
> Regrets:
>
> J1.3 Approval of agenda
>
> J1.3.1 Additions, deletions, or corrections?

A few, in a follow-up message. Will add them if we get to them.

Accepted.

> J1.4 Review of recent minutes and administrative items
>
> J1.4.1 Minutes of meeting #637 (Tim)
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-query/2016Mar/0034.html

Accepted.

> J1.5 Review of action items
>
> NOTE: Please be prepared to respond quickly on your action items!
>
> J1.5.1 Outstanding action items
>
> ACTION A-634-04 (bug 29498) Jonathan to ensure that all terms that use
> RFC rendition (e.g. "required", "recommended") are listed in the
> terminology section.
>
> Status: Pending; ETA 2016-03-22

Pending.

> ACTION A-635-04: JRobie to editorially fix Bug 29487 (Section 3.11.3.1 Unary
> Lookup wrongly compares array?* to array:flatten)
>
> Status: Pending; ETA 2016-03-22

Pending.

> ACTION A-635-05: O'Neil to go through the bugs in the defunct Bugzilla
> component "XML Query Test Suite", closing or moving each as appropriate.
>
> Status: Pending; ETA 2016-03-22

Some progress, but still pending.

> ACTION A-636-06:  Jonathan to ensure that the classification of
> functions implemented by an XQuery expression covers the case where
> the function body is empty. 
>
> **See: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-query/2016Mar/0040.html
> Status: Pending; ETA 2016-03-22

Pending.

> ACTION A-636-08:  Jonathan to adopt the proposal in comment 0 of bug 29526.
>
> Status: Pending; ETA not specified.

Pending.

> ACTION A-637-01.  MKay to respond to Bug 29534 - format-number.
>
> Status: Pending; ETA not specified.

Pending.

> ACTION A-637-02:  JRobie to include the note in Comment #8 of Bug 29419.
>
> Status: Pending; ETA not specified.

Pending.

> J1.5.2 Completed action items

> ACTION A-637-03:  O'Neil to respond to Bug 29408 (Precision in 
> extvardeclwithouttype-18)
>
> Status: Pending; ETA not specified.

Completed, but there have been responses that would benefit from
discussion.

> J1.6 Update on related activities
>
> J1.6.1 Update on XSLT WG activities (Sharon, MikeK)
>
> J1.6.2 Update on EXPath/EXQuery CG activities (Mike)
>
> J1.7 Future Meetings
>
> J1.7.1 QT Meeting Schedule
>
> [V44] Joint XML Query/XSL WG meeting schedule
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-query/2015Dec/0000.html
>
> J1.7.2 Future F2F Meetings

Liam asked about TPAC, but hasn’t seen any replies.

Liam: We need to decide within the next week. We probably won’t have
any XQuery work, but we might have joint work.

Liam: I’ll provisionally assume we won’t meet but I’ll suggest that
Sharon get a room large enough to accommodate a few extra people just
in case.

> J1.7.2.1 Other future F2F meetings
>
> None scheduled.
>
> J2. Documents For Review
>
> (none)
>
> J3. Maintenance Issues
>
> J3.0 The XML Query WG and XSLT WG do not intend to maintains specs 
> earlier than the 3.0 suite of documents; when the 3.1 suite reaches 
> Recommendation, maintenance of the 3.0 documents will be terminated.
>
> This agenda item is reserved for reporting errors and other problems 
> reported against the 3.0 (later, 3.1) suite of specifications.
>
> J3.0.1 Concerns raised by the XSLT working group in regards to potential
> completion delays of XSLT 3.0 if XPath 3.0 is made obsoleted by 3.1
>
> Status: Pending the outcome of Abel's review of 3.0 bugs/errata.
>         Any change to the status of the 3.0 specs requires explicit XSL WG
>         consultation. 
>
> J3.1 Bugzilla Bugs filed against the 3.0 suite of joint XML Query WG and 
> XSLT WG documents
>
> (none)
>
> J4. Active Specification Development
>
> ** Note: Full Text 3.1 has been removed from the WG agenda.
> If, in the future, there is sufficient interest (i.e. at least two
> independent participants to develop the spec and implementations),
> then this can be brought back on the agenda.
>
> J4.1 Data Model 3.1 (Norm)
>
> J4.1.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-datamodel-31/html/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-datamodel-31/html/Overview-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-datamodel-31/src/changes.txt
>
> (none)
>
> J4.2 Functions and Operators 3.1 (Mike Kay)
>
> J4.2.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-functions-31/html/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-functions-31/html/Overview-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-functions-31/src/changes.txt
>
> J4.2.1 Bug 29534 - format-number
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29534
>
> Status: Pending completion of A-637-01

Liam: Not ready to discuss, still awaiting the pending action. There
are five others that we can look at briefly, though they’ve come in
with relatively short notice.

==> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29551

Abel: I read the spec as saying that the output of uri-collection could be the
input to xsl:stream. You have to do it one-by-one but that’s not how I read it.
And the uri-collection has to be streamable which isn’t stated.

Some discussion of how to change it without running afoul of the
ability to do processing in parallel.

Abel: It says “it allows the documents in a collection…” but it isn’t the documents.
You get back streaming nodes not document nodes. It’s the same documents but it’s
not the same.

MikeK: We often use “documents” to include streaming nodes.

Abel: It’s in an explanatory section so we could drop the comment.

Liam: The original commenter has agreed to withdraw the comment,
please mark it as closed.

Liam, I’m going to skip a couple of bugs that I think are editorial, next:

==> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29548

Liam: Arguably, this could be discussed by the XSLT WG.

MikeK: This is purely a production problem; it’s just something done
in the stylesheet. There was never any intent to have it appear in the
spec.

Abel: I proposed that we have a generic statement in the spec about
streaming errors.

MikeK: I think that begs more questions that it answers.

Liam: Unless with have an error code, which we don’t, I think that
would make things more confusing.

Consensus settles on not adding it.

Liam: You’re going to fix this in the stylesheets, right Mike?

MikeK: Yes.

Liam: The last one is just a typo, so I don’t think we need to talk
about that one today.

> J4.3 Serialization 3.1 (Michael Sperberg-McQueen, Andy)
>
> J4.3.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xslt-xquery-serialization-31/html/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xslt-xquery-serialization-31/html/Overview-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xslt-xquery-serialization-31/src/changes.txt
>
> (none)
>
> J4.4 XPath 3.1 (Jonathan)
>
> J4.4.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/html/xpath-31.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/html/xpath-31-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/src/changes.txt
>
> J4.4.1 Bug 29501 - [xp31] Colon is not in the list of non-terminal symbols
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29501
>
> Status: Pending completion of A-635-03 (MDyck)

Liam: We can’t talk about this one without MDyck.

Jonathan: I don’t think we can talk about any of these without MDyck.

Liam: We’ve got one new one: https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29552

Some discussion of whether or not this is a historical artifact
related to XML Schema 1.0.

Abel: Yes, Schema 1.0 said 18 but 1.1 says 16.

Some discussion of backwards- and forwards-compatibility and the
ability (or inability) to write a schema that depends on one or
another length.

Josh: With maps and arrays, we also have a function, op:compare-key,
that requires that decimal have enough precision to represent double.

MKay: That’s a local problem; you can use an arbitrary precision decimal
library for that purpose without using it everywhere else.

Josh: But how likely is it to have two different implementations of
decimal?

MKay: There are other ways around that problem, you don’t need to do
arithmetic with those values so you could use strings.

Josh: Ok, I withdraw the comment.

Liam reviews comment 8 on bug #29419 which is where this text came
from.

Liam: We have two proposals: one is to make comment 8 more specific by
enumerating the cases for Schema 1.0 vs 1.1, the other is to delete
the parenthetical comment. The note goes on to say that you need 20
digits in practice anyway.

Liam: Does anyone object to deleting the parenthetical comment?

Abel: Wait, I think the spec says something about 18 digits elsewhere.

MKay/Liam report not being able to find it either.

MKay: Section 5.3 in the XQuery spec…

-> https://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-31/#id-data-model-conformance

Abel: The section where we currently explain differences between
numeric operations between XSD 1.0 and 1.1:

-> https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-functions-31/html/Overview-diff.html#numeric-types

Liam: In XQuery 1.0 we said 18:

-> https://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#id-data-model-conformance

Liam: So we can’t reduce it without potentially breaking queries.
So there’s a third proposal which is to keep it at 18.

Abel: I think that would be my preference, to have only one such
limit. I would feel more comfortable with it being 20, but it’s
probably too late for that.

Liam: I propose that we can close this without change. We already
require 18 so we can’t reduce it to 16.

CMSMcQ: I think there are two points: the statement in the note that
we just voted to amend, 16 vs 18 in XSD; and the second which is what
is normatively stated about one or more of our specs. Removing that
note doesn’t have any impact on our specs. So I think deciding to
leave our normative statement at 18 is the correct decision, but I
don’t think that it requires putting that parenthetical remark back
in.

Some discussion about whether or not the XPath (as opposed to XQuery)
spec has any statement of limits.

CMSMcQ: That’s consistent with putting such limits in the host language.

MikeK: XSLT mentions the contradiction explicitly:
-> https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xslt-30/html/Overview-diff.html#limits

Liam: The XSD specification allows implementations to impose a limit
(which must not be less than 18 digits) on the size of integer and
decimal values. [https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29419]
Removing the note would get rid of confusion and both host languages
already make an explicit statement so it would be ok.

Abel: We already have a note (in F&O 4.1) about dealing with other
things like negative zero. If we do want to say anything about the
limits, that would be a good place to do so.

-> https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xpath-functions-31/html/Overview.html#numeric-types

Liam proposes that the note should go in Conformance because that’s
where it occurs in the other specs.

CMSMcQ: I’m coming to agree with Liam, that there’s nothing to do here.

Liam: We could say that instead of saying “less than 18 digits”, we
say that the host language has to specify and that it must not be less
than 18 digits. At that point it’s editorial anyway.

Liam: I propose to resolve bug 29419 by removing “which must not be
less than 18 digits” and to allow editor’s discretion to add a note
about the host language defining a limit.

Accepted.

Liam, I’ve added that resolution to 29419 and reopened it so that it
doesn’t get forgotten.

Liam: Can you please close your bug and point to 29419.

Abel: Yes, I’ll do that.

> J4.4.2 Bug 29277 - [XP31] Evaluating function calls does not mention
> evaluation of dynamic or static function calls that have no
> FunctionBody
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29277
>
> Status: Ready to discuss
>
> J4.4.3 Bug 29509 - Functions: External, Implementation-Defined, Host Language
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29509
>  
> Status: Pending resolution of bug 29277
>
> J4.4.4 Necessary whitespace?
> See: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-query/2016Mar/0037.html
>
> Status: Ready to discuss
>
> J4.5 Grammar Test Applets (Michael Dyck)
>
> J4.5.1 Bugzilla Bug 13796, [Applet30] \u escaped characters in grammar 
> applets
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13796
>
> Status: Pending
>
> J4.6 QT3 test suite (O'Neil)
>
> J4.6.1 Status report on test suite, harness, tools
>
> J4.6.2 Status of 3.1 tests results
>
> Status: Currently three implementers submitted results
>
> J5. Progression of Work
>
> J5.1 XSLT 3.0, XQuery 3.1, XQueryX 3.1, XPath 3.1, XDM 3.1, F&O 3.1, 
> Serialization 3.1
>
> J5.1.1 Current status
>
> * In Candidate Recommendation; awaiting implementation reports
>
> J5.1.2 Dependencies inhibiting progression
>
> * Completion of test suite minimum-required-to-declare-victory
>
> * Sufficient implementation experience and reports thereof
>
> * Formal response to all comments, responses accepted by commenters
>
> * PR Transition Request and authorization, PR pub request
>
> * REC Transition Request and authorization, REC pub request
>
> J5.2 Update 3.0
>
> J5.2.1 Current Status
>
> * In Last Call Working Draft
>
> At XML Prague, Liam talked to a few people about XQuery Update but
> found no great enthusiasm for doing the work.  We cannot progress
> without plans for a test suite and potential implementers.  The WG
> needs to decide what to do with this spec.
>
> Status: Ready to discuss
>
> J5.2.2 Require owner of XQUF 3.0 Test Suite
>
> J5.2.3 Dependencies inhibiting progression
>
> * CR Transition Request and authorization, CR pub request
>
> * Completion of test suite minimum-required-to-declare-victory
>
> * Sufficient implementation experience and reports thereof
>
> * Formal response to all comments, responses accepted by commenters
>
> * PR Transition Request and authorization, PR pub request
>
> * REC Transition Request and authorization, REC pub request
>
> J6. Any other business
>
> J6.1 Consideration of future work
>
> J6.1.1 QT 3.2
>
> The WGs decided that we will finish the 3.1 documents presently under way,
> but undertake no new work. Maintenance work should be planned upon for a
> period of time after finishing the specifications. 
>
> J6.1.2 FT 3.1
>
> Currently inadequate interest and resources
>
> J6.1.3 Update 3.1
>
> Currently inadequate interest and resources
>
> J7. Adjourn
>
> =======================
> XML Query Working Group
> =======================
>
> Q1. The XML Query WG does not intend to maintains specs earlier than the 
> 3.0 suite of documents; when the 3.1 suite reaches Recommendation, 
> maintenance of the 3.0 documents will be terminated.
>
> Q1.0 This agenda item is reserved for reporting errors and other 
> problems reported against the 3.0 (later, 3.1) XML Query WG suite of 
> specifications.
>
> Q1.1 Bugzilla Bugs filed against the 3.0 suite of XML Query WG documents
>
> (none)
>
> Q2. Active Specification Development
>
> Q2.1 XQuery Update Facility 3.0 (John)
>
> Q2.1.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-update-30/html/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-update-30/html/Overview-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-update-30/src/changes.txt
>
> * The WG needs to obtain implementation experience with this document.
>
> Q2.2 XQuery Update Facility 3.0 Requirements and Use Cases (Andy)
> See 
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/requirements/xquery-update-30/html/Overview.html
>
> * The WGs need to be certain that this document is completed 
> (red/yellow/green bullets on requirements, all the use cases intended to 
> be published) and a decision made to advance it to WG Note.
>
> Q2.3 XQuery 3.1 (Jonathan)
>
> Q2.3.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/html/xquery-31.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/html/xquery-31-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xquery-31/src/changes.txt
>
> (none)
>
> Q2.4 XQueryX 3.1 (Josh)
>
> Q2.4.0 Internal working draft
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xqueryx-31/html/Overview.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xqueryx-31/html/Overview-diff.html
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xqueryx-31/src/changes.txt
>
> (none)
>
> Q3. Test Suite Development
>
> Q3.1 Update Facility 3.0 Test Suite (????)
>
> * Need test suite developer/manager
>
> * Need tests 

Q4. Any other business

None heard.

Q5. Adjourn

Adjourned.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 512 761 6676
www.marklogic.com