- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 11:37:56 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2d3v7tdpn.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minute
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
Meeting 176, 01 Jul 2010
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Norm, Henry, Vojtech, Paul
Regrets
Mohamed, Alex
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, 8 July 2010?
4. [8]XProc Errata
5. [9]Editor's draft of XML Processor Profiles
6. [10]Any other business
* [11]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept this agenda?
-> [12]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda
Accepted.
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [13]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/06/24-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting: telcon, 8 July 2010?
Paul and Vojtech give regrets
XProc Errata
-> [14]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-proposed-errata
Norm: Anyone have any questions or comments about E01 and/or E02?
... Hearing none, I propose that we accept them.
Accepted.
Some discussion of what to do next; updating the errata document is the
answer.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to construct an update to the errata document
pointed to from the spec and pass it off to someone who can update it.
[recorded in [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
Norm: Vojtech, you had a question about namespace bindings.
Vojtech: Yes, in 5.7.5, in the first list, there are rules about how to
construct namespace bindings.
... The way I understand it now, if an XPath expression returns a sequence
of nodes, then we use the in-scope namespace bindings off the first node
if the expression returns a node set.
Norm: I think that exists so that if an expression selects a QName in
content, the right namespace bindings are carried forward.
General agreement that everything is ok.
Editor's draft of XML Processor Profiles
-> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles
Some discussion of Paul's comment
->
[17]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2010Jun/0026.html
Henry: I think this would be clearer if we changed "conformant processor"
to "conformant XProc processor" in that sentence.
Paul: I think that could be clearer.
... I'm happy to leave the improvements to the editor.
Norm: Paul also asks about a profile that's smaller than "minimum". I
don't feel strongly about the names.
... How about "minimum", "basic", "modest", and "recommended"
Paul: That sounds good.
Norm: Anyone have concerns about these names?
None heard.
Norm: Paul's last comment is mostly editorial, but I agree.
General agreement that it should read "reading and processing" as Paul
suggests.
Henry: Perhaps I should report on my action to add something about
invariants
... I've started. Looking over the XML Spec again, it's not going to be as
nice as I'd like.
... The best I can do for the first two profiles (which don't read any
external markup) is to say things in two parts.
... For documents which are, or should be, standalone=yes and for
documents which are standalone=no
... Because for documents which are standalone=no, if you don't read the
external subset there isn't much you can say.
... You aren't gauranteed to get much at all.
... The most you can say is that you'll get the document element name and
attributes (provided they don't contain entity references)
... But almost no one bothers with standalone="yes" and the default is
standalone="no", so it'll be tricky to get right.
... Especially since processors aren't required to report unexpanded
entities.
... But the other two are easier and I think we can get somewhere with
them.
... The scope for variation is reduced after the external subset has been
read and processed.
Norm summarizes the state of the issues list, not much progress to be made
today
Any other business
Adjourned
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to construct an update to the errata document pointed
to from the spec and pass it off to someone who can update it. [recorded
in [18]http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([20]CVS
log)
$Date: 2010/07/01 15:37:05 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#item06
11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-minutes#ActionSummary
12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/07/01-agenda
13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/06/24-minutes
14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-proposed-errata
15. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01
16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles
17. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2010Jun/0026.html
18. http://www.w3.org/2010/07/01-xproc-minutes.html#action01
19. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
20. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 15:38:39 UTC