XProc Minutes 24 Feb 2011

[1]W3C

                                   - DRAFT -

                            XML Processing Model WG

24 Feb 2011

   [2]Agenda

   See also: [3]IRC log

Attendees

   Present
           Norm, Paul, Vojtech, Alex, Mohamed

   Regrets
           Henry

   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, 10 Mar 2011?
         4. [8]XML processor profiles
         5. [9]Any other business?

     * [10]Summary of Action Items

   --------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Accept this agenda?

   -> [11]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-agenda.html

   Accepted.

  Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

   -> [12]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/17-minutes.html

   Accepted.

  Next meeting: telcon, 10 Mar 2011?

   No regrets heard

  XML processor profiles

   -> [13]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles.html

   Norm: I like it. It's a little confusing but that's not our fault.

   Vojtech: It seems to me that we have six classes (A, B, B', P, V, and X)
   and then a list of which information items exist and which classes they
   apply to.
   ... But B and P are always used together so why can't we just merge them?
   ... Also, if you look at the profiles, there are no conflicts.

   Norm: I think A, B, and B' are about what the profiles provide; P, V, and
   X are about the items provided by the underlying processor. I think it
   would be a category error to combine them.

   Vojtech: Oh, ok.
   ... If someone wanted to introduce a different profile, maybe they'd need
   the distinction.

   Alex: And it's a clear indication of where things could be simpler.
   ... If I had a particular processor and I wanted to see if I conformed,
   that would require merging states like V and P.

   Norm: They things you have to provide to conform are enumerated in the
   sections above. For example, 2.2 says your underlying processor has to
   provide P and X.

   Alex: None use V

   Norm: No, we don't have a profile that requires DTD validation, which I
   think is the right thing.
   ... Paul, I know you asked some folks from XML Core to review it
   carefully, but I don't think that's happened yet.

   Paul: That's right.

   Vojtech: I asked about the references property, but I guess that's still
   unresolved.

   Norm: No, under Attribute Information Item, I think that's resolved.

   Vojtech: Oh, ok, I see. Yes.

   Norm: Any other discussion?

   I propose that we give the Core folks a week or so to review. If something
   significant comes up, we'll hold off on publication. Otherwise, we
   republish this as a new Last Call WD sometime early in March.

   Norm: Any objections?

   None heard.

  Any other business?

   Adjourned.

Summary of Action Items

   [End of minutes]

   --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [14]scribe.perl version 1.135 ([15]CVS
    log)
    $Date: 2011/03/07 14:41:02 $

References

   1. http://www.w3.org/
   2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-agenda
   3. http://www.w3.org/2011/02/24-xproc-irc
   4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#agenda
   5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#item01
   6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#item02
   7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#item03
   8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#item04
   9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#item05
  10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes#ActionSummary
  11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-agenda.html
  12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/17-minutes.html
  13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles.html
  14. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
  15. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/