Re: draft agenda for ixml community group meeting Tuesday 15 February 2022

Good idea on scribe duty; is there a brief cheat or howto guide for the irc minute taking bot?

Also, I’m afraid I must apologise.  We are currently looking to move house and have a viewing. Yesterday a house that had been online for 3 hours already had 60 (yes, sixty) viewing appointments when we called, and a waiting list, so we have to make the most of what’s available!

I had one action, which is complete (github permisions)

Thanks,
Tom

_________________
Tomos Hillman
eXpertML Ltd
+44 7793 242058
On 15 Feb 2022, 12:00 AM +0000, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>, wrote:
> [I have unilaterally decided that we will keep a rota for scribe duty;
> the current state of the list is in the 'Next meeting' section. I'll
> volunteer to scribe tomorrow, unless someone else really wants to. Then
> Bethan, John, and Tom are up, in the order in which volunteering
> happens.]
>
>
> ixml meeting 15 February 2022
>
> When: Tuesday 15 February 2022 15:30 UTC for 1 hour
> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ixml+online+meeting+15+February&iso=20220215T1530
>
> Where: Location: https://meet.google.com/dfz-rwpj-opq
>
> Minute taker: MSM
>
> IRC: the meetings will be minuted on IRC at irc://irc.w3.org:6667/%23ixml
> Details of W3C IRC use are at [1] and [2].
> [1] https://www.w3.org/wiki/InternetRelayChat
> [2] https://www.w3.org/wiki/IRC
>
> Previous minutes: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Feb/0133.html
> https://www.w3.org/2022/02/08-ixml-minutes
>
> AGENDA
>
> Topic: Review of agenda
>
> 0 Identify minute-taker
>
> 1 Review of action items
>
> 2 Status reports
>
> Status of implementations
> Status of testing and test suites
>
> 3 Review and resolution of issues
>
> # 24 accept the whole input?
> # 6 media type
> - cluster of issues on conformance (31, 33, 20, 25, 18, 23, 21)
> # 28 schema for grammars
> # 26 ambiguity
> ...
>
> 4 Other topics
>
> Rota for minute-taking?
> Website
> Release plan
>
> 5 Next meeting (and next scribe)
>
> 6 Any other business
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Previous Actions
> ****************************************************************
>
> ACTION (20220208-01): Tomos to make sure everyone has write access
> to the repo and accept PR #32.
>
> ACTION (20220208-02): Steven to draft a concrete proposal for the
> spec, to resolve issue #24 (does ixml have to match the whole input?),
> using information from the straw poll. CG to review.
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Status reports
> ****************************************************************
>
> Topic: Status of implementations
>
> Topic: Status of testing and test suites
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Review and resolution of bug reports and technical issues
> ****************************************************************
>
> For all active issues, see https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/
>
>
> Topic: Conformance issue: which grammars to accept and reject (et al.)
>
> Several threads and open issues are relevant here:
> - Accept ixml only or ixml and XML grammars?
> - Are processors required to detect non-conformance in grammars?
> - What constitutes non-conformance in grammars? Are some grammar
> errors detectable only when exercised by the input?
> - What should the spec say about other run-time errors unrelated
> to the grammar and the input?
> - What should the spec say about non-XML characters?
> - What should the spec say about ill-formed output?
> - What should the spec say about ungrammatical input?
> - What should the spec say about ill-formed grammars (grammars which
> are not grammatical according to the grammar for grammars?
>
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/31
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/33
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/20
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/25
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/18
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/23
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/21
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Dec/0072.html
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Dec/0073.html
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Dec/0077.html
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0028.html
>
> Topic: Issue #28 Schema for grammars
>
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/28
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Dec/0009.html
>
> Topic: Spec issue #26 - how is ambiguity defined?
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0030.html
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/26
>
> Topic: XML, VXML, output of ixml processing
>
> Dave Pawson asked that this be a "(hopefully brief) agenda item".
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0150.html
>
> Topic: Terminological issues: what is an 'error'?
>
> Is it an 'error' for the input string not to be a sentence in the
> language described by the input grammar? Agenda item requested by
> Dave Pawson.
>
> See https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Feb/0085.html
> and the surrounding thread
>
> Topic: Pragmas proposal (continued)
>
> Brief summary of TM proposal:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0029.html
>
> Proposal: misc/pragmas-proposal.md in proposal-pragmas branch:
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/blob/proposal-pragmas/misc/pragmas-proposal.md
>
> Background: misc/pragmas.md in proposal-pragmas branch:
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/blob/proposal-pragmas/misc/pragmas.md
>
> (This is a longer discussion of the proposal, with alternatives;
> discussion of requirements, desiderata, and design principles; and
> worked examples showing how processors might use the pragmas
> proposal for support of various kinds of additional functionality.)
>
> Strawman proposal from SP:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0102.html
>
> Specific issue: is there a reason for pragmas to nest?
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/30
>
> Specific issue: are the constraints on what a pragma can change or do?
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/29
>
> See also (older discussions):
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Jun/0003 (pragmas)
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2021Jul/0002 (namespace decls, locality)
>
> During the discussion this past week, Dave Pawson asked that the
> application of pragmas to parse trees be an agenda item:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Jan/0169.html
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Other topics
> ****************************************************************
>
> Topic: Minute-taking
>
> Proposal: we should rotate minute-taking.
>
>
> Topic: Website
>
> https://invisiblexml.org
> https://github.com/invisibleXML/
>
> Topic: Release plan
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Next meeting
> ****************************************************************
>
> Normal date for ixml meetings is every Tuesday at 15:30 UTC
>
> On the usual schedule, the next meeting would be Tuesday 22 February,
> at 15:30 UTC for one hour.
> https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=ixml+online+meeting&iso=20220222T1530
>
> Expected scribe next week: volunteers sought.
>
> [For the record: we have regrets from SP for 8 March, from JL for 8
> and 15 March.]
>
> [For the record: the current state of the minute-taking rota is:
>
> M Sperberg-McQueen
> Bethan Tovey-Walsh
> Tomos Hillman
> John Lumley
>
> Steven Pemberton 2022-01-25
> Dave Pawson 2022-02-01
> Norm Tovey-Walsh 2022-02-08
>
>
>
> ****************************************************************
> Topic: Any other business
> ****************************************************************
>
>
>
> --
> C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
> Black Mesa Technologies LLC
> http://blackmesatech.com
>