- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:36:00 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m27i6ys3jz.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes [1]W3C - DRAFT - XML Processing Model WG Meeting 130, 20 Nov 2008 [2]Agenda See also: [3]IRC log Attendees Present Norm, Mohamed, Alex, Paul, Henry, Richard Regrets Michael Chair Norm Scribe Norm Contents * [4]Topics 1. [5]Accept this agenda? 2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 3. [7]Next meeting: telcon 4 Dec 2008? 4. [8]Fixing static context before CR 5. [9]Fixing p:wrap match="/" 6. [10]Allow extension steps to use c: namespace 7. [11]Any other comments on the CR draft. 8. [12]Any other business? * [13]Summary of Action Items -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Accept this agenda? -> [14]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda Accepted. Accept minutes from the previous meeting? -> [15]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/13-minutes Accepted. Next meeting: telcon 4 Dec 2008? Skipping 27 Nov, US Thanksgiving. No regrets heard. Fixing static context before CR -> [16]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Nov/0098.html Norm explains the situation and proposes to strike "or made available through p:namespaces" Accepted. Fixing p:wrap match="/" Norm explains that it's only about user convenience. Henry suggests that since XSLT 2.0 allows something similar, we should too. Alex: I agree with Henry Norm: If you match /, you get all the nodes in the document. Mohamed: Is it the only place where we should do this? Norm: After a quick check, I don't see any others that make any sense. Proposal: Make the change. Mohamed: What about www-form-url-encode. Norm: Well...www-form-url-encode does allow match=/, but will invariably produce a dynamic error if you do that. Accepted. Allow extension steps to use c: namespace See: [17]http://exproc.org/proposed/steps/ Norm: I think we should allow people to reuse the c: namespace. Alex: I wouldn't want to restrict what people can produce from their steps. Mohamed: We have three namespaces, on two of them we explicitly don't want people to reuse them. Richard: What about in inline documents? Norm: We're pretty clear that content in an inline is just content and we don't care what it is. Mohamed: If we used the c: namespace and we use an element that's already been defined in this specification, can we add an attribute to it? Henry: I think we should just say that common sense suggests that such usages shouldn't overlap with the uses defined in this spec. unless the usage is identical. Alex: I'm with Henry. Mohamed: Today we don't mandate that if you extend the output of an existing step, you must use an extension attribute. So you could put a @type on c:result and that might effect interoperability. Norm: This is a bigger can of worms than I thought, perhaps we shouldn't say anything. ... If we do this later, does it push us back in the process? Henry: No, how could it effect the conformance of an implementation. This isn't a big deal. <richard> X crashed :-( Norm: So do we want to try to nail this down today, or come back to it later. Henry: I'm fine to come back later Mohamed: Me too. Norm: Ok, we'll leave this. Any other comments on the CR draft. -> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/CR-xproc-20081126/ Norm: Any comments? Mohamed: Congratulations! Norm: Congrats to us all. Any other business? Mohamed: What's the future work? Norm: We need to get the test suite finished, we need to encourage implementors, and we need to turn our attention to the default XML processing model. Adjourned. Summary of Action Items [End of minutes] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.133 ([20]CVS log) $Date: 2008/11/20 17:35:17 $ References Visible links 1. http://www.w3.org/ 2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda 3. http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-xproc-irc 4. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#agenda 5. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item01 6. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item02 7. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item03 8. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item04 9. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item05 10. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item06 11. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item07 12. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#item08 13. file:///projects/w3c/WWW/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-minutes.html#ActionSummary 14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/20-agenda 15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/13-minutes 16. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Nov/0098.html 17. http://exproc.org/proposed/steps/ 18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/CR-xproc-20081126/ 19. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm 20. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 20 November 2008 17:36:42 UTC