minutes of iXML community group meeting 30 April 2024

Minutes of today's meeting are at
https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes -- a textual version is
appended for those who find it convenient.

New action items:

ACTION 2024-04-30-a: Norm to propose wording for possible changes to
                     status reporting, with particular respect to
                     reporting of iXML version used by processor.

ACTION 2024-04-30-b: Bethan to open an issue on whether to adopt a
                     scheme to distinguish 'major' from 'minor'
                     versions in version numbers.

................

   [1]W3C

                   Invisible XML Community Group

30 April 2024

   [2]Previous meeting. [3]Agenda. [4]IRC log.

Attendees

   Present
          Bethan Tovey-Walsh, John Lumley, Michael
          Sperberg-McQueen, Norm Tovey-Walsh, Steven Pemberton

   Regrets
          -

   Chair
          Steven Pemberton

   Scribe
          Michael Sperberg-McQueen

Contents

    1. [5]Status of implementations
    2. [6]Round-tripping
    3. [7]Status of testing and test suites
    4. [8]Version numbers
    5. [9]Issue #236 When must version numbers change?
    6. [10]Any other business
    7. [11]Summary of action items
    8. [12]Summary of resolutions

Meeting minutes

   Action 2023-01-10-f continues.

   Action 2024-03-05-c shows progress - using ssh is better,
   for github, than using http.

   Action 2024-03-19-a is awaiting work by Norm.

   Action 2024-04-16-a continues.

   Action 2024-04-16-d is done.

   Action 2024-04-16-e is done.

   Other actions are continuing.

* Status of implementations

   Nothing to report.

* Round-tripping

   John asks for info from Steven's paper on round-tripping
   for Prague, to mention it in his round-tripping paper for
   Balisage.

* Status of testing and test suites

   Nothing to report.

* Version numbers

   <norm> [13]https://invisiblexml.org/pr/243/index.html#L3041

   Pull request #243 is Norm's attempt to improve the
   situation, although it does not attempt to resolve all
   issues.

   <norm> [14]https://invisiblexml.org/pr/243/
   autodiff.html#L3041

   John: so the upshot is that under these rules, a processor
   supporting renaming is no longer required to require a
   version 1.1 declaration.

   Norm: yes.

   Norm proposes to take another action to work on ixml:state.

   At the least, 'version-mismatch' is a clumsy term. Perhaps
   you need to say which version you actually used.

   John: no good to say "we ran it under some other version"
   without telling you what you ran it under.

   Bethan: and the name ixml:state is not a great match for
   this meaning.

   Steven: yes, it started simple and we have put a lot more
   into it.

   Norm muses on a possible separate attribute like, say,
   ixml:version to say what version was used.

   ACTION: Norm to propose wording for possible changes to
   status reporting.

   Discussion over whether the presence of an ixml:* attribute
   is always / still an indicator that something did not run
   cleanly.

   MSM thinks reporting which version was used for an
   unlabeled grammar is not a sign that something didn't run
   cleanly.

   Norm suggests that perhaps it's just the presence of
   ixml:state that indicates something a bit off.

   <Steven> I think that if you don't specify a number, you
   don't care, and so shouldn't get an "error"

   RESOLUTION: to merge PR #243.

   Issue #237 can now be closed.

   Issue #238 can now be closed.

* Issue #236 When must version numbers change?

   Steven suggests that when new syntax is allowed, no version
   number change is needed. A down-version processor will
   reject the new syntax on purely syntactic grounds.

   Discussion of what "no version number is needed" means.

   Steven is considering the question "when does a grammar
   need to declare its version number?"

   He is not proposing that we not use a new version number on
   the specification.

   John suggests thinking about what language(s) a grammar is
   a sentence in.

   To take a concrete example, a grammar that uses renaming
   will be a member of L(1.1) but not of L(1.0).

   A grammar that does not use renaming will be a member of
   both.

   MSM attempts to summarize our consensus:
   … If the set of strings accepted by the specification
   grammar does not change,
   … and the XML structures to which they are mapped do not
   change,
   … and the meaning of those structures does not change,
   … then a revision of the spec need not carry a new version
   number.

   If any of those things change, the spec requires a new
   version number.

   No version number is required on the input grammar.

   Including it will assist clarification / diagnosis of
   problems.

   Omitting a version number in the input grammar will lead
   the processor to process the grammar using some version. If
   the string is accepted,
   … and the meaning has not changed, the user will be happy.

   If the meaning has changed, the user may or may not be
   happy.

   ACTION: Bethan to open an issue on whether to distinguish
   'major' from 'minor' versions.

   RESOLUTION: close issue #236 on the basis indicated.

   (Steven points out that this resolution is not about what
   he thought #236 was about in the first place, but is
   willing to close #236.)

* Any other business

   Norm and Steven are going to Prague, but no one else is
   planning to be there.

   Steven reports that John Chelsom's City EHR health records
   system is being rolled out in Ukraine.

   John Chelsom is of course looking for volunteers to help on
   this open-source problems.

   We agreed to cancel the meeting of 14 May (conflict for NTW
   and MSM).

   Next meeting 28 May.

   John Lumley offers regrets for 28 May.

Summary of action items

    1. [15]Norm to propose wording for possible changes to
       status reporting.
    2. [16]Bethan to open an issue on whether to distinguish
       'major' from 'minor' versions.

Summary of resolutions

    1. [17]to merge PR #243.
    2. [18]close issue #236 on the basis indicated.


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    [19]scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023
    UTC).

References

   1. https://www.w3.org/
   2. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/16-ixml-minutes
   3. https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2024Apr/0011.html
   4. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-irc
   5. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t01
   6. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t02
   7. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t03
   8. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t04
   9. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t05
  10. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#t06
  11. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#ActionSummary
  12. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary
  13. https://invisiblexml.org/pr/243/index.html#L3041
  14. https://invisiblexml.org/pr/243/autodiff.html#L3041
  15. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#a01
  16. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#a02
  17. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#r01
  18. https://www.w3.org/2024/04/30-ixml-minutes.html#r02
  19. https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html

-- 
C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
Black Mesa Technologies LLC
http://blackmesatech.com

Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2024 15:03:14 UTC