- 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