- From: Achim Berndzen <achim.berndzen@xml-project.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 18:34:15 +0100
- To: XProc Dev <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Hi all, > Am 15.12.2016 um 08:49 schrieb David Maus <maus@hab.de>: > > My main challenge with the current situation is that it is hard for me > to figure out which errata or bugs of the 1.0 spec a) exist und b) had > already been discussed and/or fixed while drafting the 2.0 spec and c) > are dealt with in Calabash and/or Morgana. I am currently having the same troubles. @Norm: Is it possible and would it help to raise the issues from https://github.com/xproc/1.0-specification/tree/xproc20/langspec/xproc20 to xproc/1.1-specification? To my reading the two versions are almost identical, so the issues on A should also be issues on B. > > @Achim & Gerrit: Could I ask you to create issues for the > interoperability problems you discussed in your XML London 2016 Paper? I will do this during the holidays. If I remember right, most of them are dealing with exproc-steps, but there are at least two related to the standard step library. From my memory the biggest point with regard to the core specs is interoperability of „p:import". The two processors may know the same step/libraries, but use different uris to access them. I think we should fix this, but currently I have different ideas how to do this. Promise to come up with a proposal in Prague! See you in Prague! Achim ------------------------------------------------ Achim Berndzen achim.berndzen@xml-project.com http://www.xml-project.com
Received on Friday, 16 December 2016 17:34:46 UTC