- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:30:27 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m262qdzxxo.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
Meeting 191, 14 Apr 2011
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Norm, Paul, Vojtech, Jim, Henry, Mohamed [IRC only], Alex
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, 21 Apr 2011?
4. [8]Meeting at TPAC2011
5. [9]Maps in XPath 3.0?
6. [10]Last call of XML processor profiles
7. [11]Recommended processor profile in the browser
8. [12]Any other business?
* [13]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept this agenda?
-> [14]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-agenda.html
Accepted
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [15]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes.html
Accepted.
Next meeting: telcon, 21 Apr 2011?
No regrets heard
Meeting at TPAC2011
Norm: I have asked for a meeting slot; I've pencilled us in for a f2f
meeting during TPAC 2011, the first week of November in Santa Clara, CA,
US.
... Anyone know for sure their plans?
Paul: I expect to be there.
<ht> I hope to be, yes
Norm: So do I.
Jim: Probably not.
Vojtech: If there's work to do, then I can arrange something.
Norm: Ok, the onus is on me to get an agenda together int ime for you to
make that decision.
Maps in XPath 3.0?
Norm: Do we have an opinion about maps?
Henry attempts to summarize the state of maps.
<jfuller> I like maps
Norm attempts as well.
Norm: In XProc 1.0, we only have strings and only XML data flows between
steps so it's not clear how we would use them.
Vojtech: I had to implement maps as extension steps for some internal use
cases.
... I keep them as a global map because they were done as steps.
... I think it would be good to have them, but it can be solved in an
implementation-dependent way.
Norm: I think if there is an XProc 2.0, then one of the things we might do
is relax the restriction on variables. At that point, we probably want
maps.
Henry: I've done some explorations in this space and looked into the most
efficient implementation. I think that's a good reason to have maps as a
first class data structure.
... If I, as a user, have a map with 10000 elements, I shouldn't have to
worry about the most efficient way to update it. That's the
implementation's job.
Some discussion of mutability. Maps aren't mutable.
<ht> I endorse John Snelson's observation wrt copying
Norm: It sounds like we'd support the idea of maps, but we can't use them
in 1.0.
<ht> +1
Norm: Anyone object to me telling the XSLT and XQuery WGs that?
No objections heard.
Jim: XML serialization?
Norm: Yes, that's possible.
Jim: What about QNames?
Norm: There's a literal syntax for those too.
Last call of XML processor profiles
Norm: Thank you Henry for doing all the heavy lifting in getting that spec
out.
Henry: No problem, sorry it took so long.
Norm: No worries.
Recommended processor profile in the browser
Alex: I've been looking at the browser XML processor, specifically in
WebKit.
... The browsers don't like to go fetch external resources unless they
absolutely have to.
... In the case of HTML, you have to go get scripts and things.
... But in the case of XML, that's not necessarily the case. In WebKit,
they've just turned off processing external entities.
... If we don't do that, then we can't do the Recommended profile. So
which profile can I follow?
... Then I realized that I lose XInclude and that's something that I think
would be useful to have in the browser.
... So I feel like I don't have a profile that fits a web browser where
you don't go get external definitions but you would like XInclude.
... Lots of languages these days aren't defined in terms of DTDs, so maybe
it's a mistake to have them.
... I looked a little bit at MathML, because they need entities and that's
the main reason for the external subset. MathML 3 seems to just say "just
use Unicode".
... So I have a feeling we have a mismatch.
... Henry, did you have specific things in mind besides math?
Henry: I don't want to lose it as a profile, because it continues to be
the profile I want. I wish the browsers would implement it.
... When I develop with standard DTDs, I can't just hand the result to the
browser, it's a real pain.
Alex: I hear what you're saying.
... If you use DTDs, you don't get the behavior you want. The real problem
is how HTML is processed which doesn't need DTD processing.
... XHTML is an XML language, and they don't want to go get external
declarations in that case.
... It turns out to be really complicated to get external declarations for
XML but not for XHTML. So people just say they don't want to deal with
DTDs.
... I'm not sure what to say there.
Henry: Neither am I.
... I not also John Cowan's comments that recently came in. He doesn't
like the last one either.
... He doesn't like the names full stop.
Norm: If all we had to do was change the names, that'd be lovely.
... I don't know what to do about the browser case.
Henry: Going back to way back to one (but not the only) item that's near
to the director's heart is the question of what infoset the author is
committed to.
... And my feeling is that it's pretty clear that its the last one and
only the last one. Crucially, if i have a DTD in the document and in the
external subset I define parity as a general entity who's value is "not"
and I write "I do &parity;(insert inflamatory reference)" in a document,
to what is the author committed?
... Clearly it's not the version of the document that doesn't have the
value for the entity.
Norm: Yeah. I think that's a pretty compelling argument for not
"recommending" anything that doesn't do the external subset.
Alex: Maybe we need to add something to deal with the standalone
declaration.
Henry: Bad idea. No one understands it, no one uses it correctly.
Norm: I expect Michael Sperberg-McQueen to file a comment about that,
based on conversations we had in Prague.
Alex: It does answer the question from the author's perspective.
Norm: It's interesting, could we "recommend" only using documents that
have standalone=yes.
Henry: On the web, we could. I don't know if I want to.
... The other side of that is the XML promise, that all XML processors can
process all well-formed documents. Surely if we recommend standalone=yes,
browsers should reject documents that assert standalone=no
Norm: So where are we?
Alex: It's a real issue because external subsets become a bottleneck.
... We should have good, solid answers to questions about how you deal
with the questions.
... And if I fall back from the recommended profile then I lose XInclude
which I don't want to lose.
... I wonder why we don't have one inbetween?
Henry: Basically because we thought five was too many.
Norm: I'm inclined to give this a week.
Henry: Can I address a completely different issue wrt the spec?
... To call people's attention to the fact that I restructured things a
bit to try to make the relationships clearer.
... This was in direct response to a comment from Liam just as we were
going out the door.
... If anyone has any problems or spots any errors, it would be helpful to
hear about that.
Norm: I like the fact they're links now.
Any other business?
None heard.
Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([17]CVS
log)
$Date: 2011/04/16 21:28:57 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2011/04/14-xproc-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item06
11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item07
12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#item08
13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-minutes#ActionSummary
14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-agenda.html
15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes.html
16. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
17. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Saturday, 16 April 2011 21:30:56 UTC