- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:46:30 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes [1]W3C - DRAFT - XML Processing Model WG Meeting 150, 23 Jul 2009 [2]Agenda See also: [3]IRC log Attendees Present Paul, Mohamed, Norm, Vojtech, Henry Regrets 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 30 July 2009 4. [8]Recent comments on the CR draft 5. [9]142 charset on unescape-markup? 6. [10]144 Semantics of p:wrap 7. [11]145 Compound steps with unconnected output ports 8. [12]146 Primary output port in p:viewport 9. [13]147 primary output ports 10. [14]Default XML processing model? 11. [15]Test suite progress? 12. [16]Any other business? * [17]Summary of Action Items -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Accept this agenda? -> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-agenda Accepted. Accept minutes from the previous meeting? -> [19]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/16-minutes Accepted. Next meeting: telcon 30 July 2009 Mohamed gives regrets. Recent comments on the CR draft -> [20]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/cr-comments/ 142 charset on unescape-markup? Vojtech: I wasn't sure what the user was trying to do. -> [21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xproc-dev/2009Jul/att-0042/00-part Vojtech: I think unescape markup ignores the charset information if the content type is a text type. ... It only uses the charset information when the data is base64 encoded, to decode the data. ... I propose two solutions. ... The output of unescape markup used the wrong charset. ... It only uses charset if the data is binary and base64 encoded. ... To make sure that the charset is used, use p:data and set the content-type to something binary. That assures that the data is base64 encoded and the charset will be used when decoding the data. ... The other solution is similar, in p:data set the charset so that p:data applies the right charset encoding. Norm: Yes. ... I think that if he got XML that was incorrectly encoded, that's a bug. Vojtech: It depends how he passed that data to unescape-markup. Norm: If p:data was used, then the charset should have been used when loading the data. ... If p:http-request was used and the return type was something Unicode, then the charset should have been used. ... If the return type was binary, then the result should have been base64 encoded and the charset should have been used when expanding that. ... I can't think of any way to get data in the wrong character set into p:unescape-markup that isn't an implementation bug. ... We're equally careful in p:http-request and p:data, so I think this is just a bug. Vojtech: I tried these approaches in Calumet and they worked. Norm: Ok, I think that makes it clear that this is an implementation error in XML Calabash Vojtech: Related to this, I have a question about p:data. If you use p:data to load a text file that's in Windows-1252 then p:data converts it to Unicode characters. ... But at least in our implementation, the charset implementation still remains in the c:result wrapper. ... I wonder if that's correct. Norm: In p:http-request, we're explicit that the content-type value must be an exact copy of the response header. ... In p:data, we have the added complication that sometimes we ahve to infer a content type. But we should probably say that it should be an exact copy if we do have one. Vojtech: Even when inferring a content type you could do some magic to infer the charset. Norm: I think we should add the same clarification here that we have in p:http-request, that the content type will reflect any charset specified even in the case where those characters have been converted to Unicode. Proposal: do that Accepted. <scribe> ACTION: Norm to update the spec to specify the charset in p:data to be as explicit as it is in p:http-request. [recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01] That covers 143 as well. 144 Semantics of p:wrap Norm: The semantics of p:wrap are intended to be recursive, unlike what I initially said. Accepted. Close without action. 145 Compound steps with unconnected output ports Vojtech summarizes his email. Norm: I think the answer is that you get an empty sequence if you try to read it. Vojtech: And if sequence=false, then you get a dynamic error? Norm: Yes, I think that's the case. Vojtech: There's discussion of this in p:for-each but not generally Norm: Right, I think we need a general statement. ... Proposed: unbound output ports on a compound step return an empty sequence when they're read, it's an error if they don't specify sequence=true Accepted. <scribe> ACTION: Norm to say this in the spec. [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02] 146 Primary output port in p:viewport Vojtech: In viewport you can specify one output port. The spec says that p:viewport must contain a single primary output port. ... So do I have to set it primary explicitly, or is will it default to primary? Norm: Yes, it will default to primary=true Vojtech: A second question: suppose you have a declare-step and you declare two output ports. ... According to the rules, the other output port will be non-primary. <p:declare-step> <p:output port="one"/> <p:output port="two" primary="false"/> </p:declare-step> General agrement: both are non-primary. 147 primary output ports Norm explains. Vojtech: There's an implicit pipe binding in the p:with-option, so I think it's bound. Norm: Yes, I think you're right. Proposal: yes, that counts. Mohamed: I don't think it's sufficient for cycle checking. Norm: I think it is sufficient for cycle testing, there's a dependency between them. <scribe> ACTION: Norm to attempt to clarify this in the spec. [recorded in [24]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03] Default XML processing model? No news, it'll be a while before we can return to this. Test suite progress? Norm: Vojtech gets a gold star for some truly tortuous tests this week. ... I think some of the burden is on my to update the coverage report. Vojtech: For tests for unconnected output ports, there is no well-defined static error for this case. Norm: Right! ... I made unconnected input ports static error and unconnected output ports static error 3. ... We should look through the spec and make sure that there's an error code for every MUST and MUST NOT. Vojtech: I'll do the review. Any other business? None heard. Adjourned. Summary of Action Items [NEW] ACTION: Norm to attempt to clarify this in the spec. [recorded in [25]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03] [NEW] ACTION: Norm to say this in the spec. [recorded in [26]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02] [NEW] ACTION: Norm to update the spec to specify the charset in p:data to be as explicit as it is in p:http-request. [recorded in [27]http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01] [End of minutes] -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minutes formatted by David Booth's [28]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([29]CVS log) $Date: 2009/07/23 16:45:35 $ References Visible links 1. http://www.w3.org/ 2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-agenda 3. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-irc 4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#agenda 5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item01 6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item02 7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item03 8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item04 9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item05 10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item06 11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item07 12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item08 13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item09 14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item10 15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item11 16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#item12 17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-minutes#ActionSummary 18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/23-agenda 19. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/16-minutes 20. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/11/cr-comments/ 21. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xproc-dev/2009Jul/att-0042/00-part 22. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01 23. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02 24. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03 25. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action03 26. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action02 27. http://www.w3.org/2009/07/23-xproc-minutes.html#action01 28. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm 29. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 23 July 2009 16:47:17 UTC