- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 10:21:08 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2k3v6xnyz.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
04 Oct 2012
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Norm, Henry, Alex, Jim, Murray, Vojtech
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 11 Oct
4. [8]Review of action items
5. [9]Short list of items for V.next
6. [10]Plan for use-cases/requirements document
7. [11]Other documents to publish?
8. [12]New comments on the comments list
9. [13]Any other business?
* [14]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accept this agenda?
-> [15]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-agenda
Accepted
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/09/06-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting: telcon 11 Oct
Alex gives regrets.
Review of action items
A-210-01: Completed
No other progress reported.
Short list of items for V.next
Norm gives brief review of email thread.
Alex: Are we still XProc if we allow non-XML through the pipeline.
Norm: It doesn't worry me.
Henry: In terms of a cost-benefit analysis in terms of update, I have a
niggling worry that we've already seen that getting your head around XProc
is a barrier to adoption. If we add this additional dimension of
complexity, it's going to get even harder.
... There's going to be another set of choices that need to be made
everytime you want to do something.
Norm: I think you can run that argument the other way too.
... Most people will eventually want to do something with non-XML so I
think that complexity is also a barrier to entry.
Alex: In the case of XSLT, you can access the resources but you can't call
templates on them.
... One of my concerns in XProc is that even though I want to be able to
process non-XML things, if we start passing non-XML around then all sorts
of things might not work at runtime.
... We have to define expected behavior for non-XML at a lot of different
points in the pipeline.
... It also makes us more of a data flow language and the "X" is just
there for historical reasons.
... I think we need to produce use cases for non-XML documents.
Norm: Vojtech, can you send some mail summarizing some use cases?
Vojtech: It's all in the XML Prague paper. One use cases was http-request
and JSON. Another was zip/unzip in the pipeline.
... I think there was one more too.
... Steps that produce non-XML output could produce the data on an output
port and then you could do other things with them.
Norm: Formatting a PDF and sending it back as a result witout writing it
to disk would be a use case.
Vojtech: I think it's really about the boundaries. It's nice if non-XML
can flow through the pipeline, it makes things simpler. You don't have to
pass around all these URI references to files. It's the very beginning of
the pipeline where you need to read some non-XML or at the end if you want
to produce non-XML.
Alex: I'm thinking of simple examples where I want to produce some non-XML
and send it via http-request. Right now we don't have a good way to model
that.
... Similarly, there's an issue of output. There's a distinction between
the edges of the pipeline and inside the pipeline.
... It's not necessarily always the data that's flowing in between.
Jim: Developers are struggling because we have a lot of different data
models. Now we're trying to figure out how we're going to manage all this
different data. Are you suggesting we should redefine our internal data
model? Extending XML to include other stuff? Or do we want to keep it on
the perimeter. We seem to be in a state of flux.
... People can now have binaries and all sorts of data living very close
together. The further away the data is in an operational infrastructure
sense, the longer it takes to do analysis on it.
... I think there might be some utility to using XProc in hadoop.
Alex: I'm not sure we're talking about mixing data models. The proposal
from Vojtech is about dealing with media-type-ness.
... If you have an XML media type, you get an XDM; for non-XML you get a
handle to a binary blob.
Vojtech: Maybe it can be even simpler, maybe you get non-XML data in a
context where you expect XML, then maybe what you see is an empty
document. But you have the media type so you can always tell.
... Then you don't have to extend the data model.
... You could just say that an XML infoset view on the data that flows in
the pipeline produces XML for XML media types and an empty document for
non-XML media types.
Norm: That seems about what I was thinking about.
Vojtech: Instead of changing XDM we should take a simple, pragmatic
approach.
... It's not full support for non-XML, it's stilly mainly an XML
processing language, it just makes things easier if you get non-XML.
Plan for use-cases/requirements document
Norm: I wonder if we should start with a more focused use
cases/requirements document
Jim: I volunteer to help edit the document.
Norm: I suggest we start with a new document that identifies a small
number of requirements that we're considering for V.next
... Then we try to add use cases to that.
Jim: Do we have a latest link for the current doc?
-> [17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langreq-v2.html
Norm: Any chance we could have that skeleton done by next Monday/Tuesday.
Jim: Yes, I think so.
Alex: I'm not sure what I can do between now and then.
Other documents to publish?
Norm: Alex, you had another document in mind, yes?
Alex: Yes, it might be good to publish a note with the 1.0 solutions.
... It would be good to let everyone see how we solved the 1.0 use cases.
<jfuller> agree with Alex approach
Norm: Can you put a first draft of that together?
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-01: Alex to produce a first draft of a "XProc 1.0
Solutions" note. [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx1]
Norm: I'm on the hook for a note about OS operations; Jim, you're still on
the hook for zip/unzip.
... Are there any other documents we think it would be beneficial to
publish?
New comments on the comments list
Norm: We need to go through and review these, but I'm not sure what the
best strategy is
... Has anyone looked at them?
Vojtech: There are two types of remarks: contradictions in our prose and
gray areas; the others are some interesting things that I didn't notice
when I was implementing certain features.
... There was this question about p:wrap-sequence and the group-adjacent
option for example. We don't define what "the same" means.
... It's a clear whole in the spec.
Jim: He's got some simpler questions, like can we add XProc as a product
to bugzilla.
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-02: Norm to ask Liam how to get XProc added to
bugzilla [recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
<jfuller>
[20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0000.html
<jfuller>
[21]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/
Norm: July 0000 does look easy to fix. Remove "is in no namespace" from
the second sentence.
Vojtech: No, I don't think that's the fix.
... In the first sentence we say it can be in any namespace but the second
says it can't be in the XProc namespace
<jfuller> +1 to that
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-03: Norm to make an erratum for July 0000 message.
[recorded in [22]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx2]
->
[23]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0002.html
Vojtech: We say that outputs of p:choose come from the subpipeline, but
p:when isn't in the subpipeline.
Norm: I think we finesse the p:when case, but I'll have to take a closer
look.
Vojtech: Basically, p:when is not a step.
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-04: Vojtech to investigate July 0002 and formulate
an erratum to address it [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx3]
<alexmilowski> Looks like we have another implementor.
->
[25]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0003.html
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-05: Jim to investigate July 0004 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
->
[27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0004.html
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-06: Vojtech to investigate July 0003 and formulate
an erratum to address it [recorded in
[28]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action03]
->
[29]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0005.html
<scribe> ACTION: A-220-07: Norm to investigate July 0005 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action04]
Any other business?
Vojtech: I asked for approval to attend TPAC and I did not get it.
Norm: If you can hang out on IRC, we'll try to keep you in the loop
... We can also try skype, google hangout, etc.
Jim: Do we have any outstanding Processor Profiles actions?
Norm: Yes, we need to get to them.
At TPAC: Norm, Jim, Henry, Mohamed, ...
Vojtech: I'll ask about Cornelia.
Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-01: Alex to produce a first draft of a "XProc 1.0
Solutions" note. [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx1]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-02: Norm to ask Liam how to get XProc added to
bugzilla [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-03: Norm to make an erratum for July 0000 message.
[recorded in [33]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx2]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-04: Vojtech to investigate July 0002 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx3]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-05: Jim to investigate July 0004 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-06: Vojtech to investigate July 0003 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: A-220-07: Norm to investigate July 0005 and formulate an
erratum to address it [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action04]
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [38]scribe.perl version 1.137 ([39]CVS
log)
$Date: 2012/10/04 15:20:13 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item06
11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item07
12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item08
13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#item09
14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-minutes#ActionSummary
15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/10/04-agenda
16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/09/06-minutes
17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langreq-v2.html
18. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx1
19. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action01
20. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0000.html
21. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/
22. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx2
23. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0002.html
24. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx3
25. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0003.html
26. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action02
27. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0004.html
28. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action03
29. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2012Jul/0005.html
30. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action04
31. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx1
32. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action01
33. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx2
34. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#actionx3
35. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action02
36. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action03
37. http://www.w3.org/2012/10/04-xproc-minutes.html#action04
38. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
39. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 4 October 2012 15:21:46 UTC