- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:14:01 -0500
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m28v5icddy.fsf@nwalsh.com>
See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes
[1]W3C
- DRAFT -
XML Processing Model WG
Meeting 229, 20 Mar 2013
[2]Agenda
See also: [3]IRC log
Attendees
Present
Norm, Jim, Vojtech, Alex
Regrets
Mohamed, Murray
Chair
Norm
Scribe
Norm
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Accept this agenda?
2. [6]Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
3. [7]Next meeting: 27 Mar 2013?
4. [8]Review of open action items
5. [9]Use cases and requirements
6. [10]Zip and unzip steps
7. [11]Bug 20995
8. [12]Bug 21002
9. [13]Any other business?
* [14]Summary of Action Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
<jfuller> note I've updated home page
[15]http://www.w3.org/XML/Processing/
<jfuller> (added link to date2type xproc ref)
Accept this agenda?
-> [16]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-agenda
+ discussion of the zip/unzip step:
[17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-zip_unzip.html
Accepted.
Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
-> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/13-minutes
Accepted.
Next meeting: 27 Mar 2013?
No regrets heard.
Review of open action items
A-213-14 completed
Use cases and requirements
No progress.
Zip and unzip steps
Jim: Are we going to have a policy on namespaces in notes?
... In the p:template note, we put the steps in the standard XProc
namespace.
... Are we going to follow that convention?
Norm: I think we can put the steps we publish as W3C Notes in the XProc
namespace.
No objections heard.
Jim: There's an open question about character sets. If you unzip an
archive, and you get a file, what is the charset? Did we agree to amend
the c:file element to include a charset?
... If not, I think we should.
Norm: I think it's a good idea, whether we did or not, I think you can add
it in the zip/unzip note.
Jim: On the zip step, we output the zip file on the result port.
Norm: I thought the zip file updated a file at the @href location.
Alex: To some extent this depends on what we do with binaries and the
pipeline in V.next.
... You could do what you're doing now, or if we get binary working, you
could pass the zip file back.
... How quickly do we want this to be published?
... I have some questions about this relating to EPUB3 and encryption.
... I don't know if we can answer them that quickly.
Jim: I reviewed EPUB3 and I think this step can do it.
... The missing bit is the signature.
Some discussion of encryption and signatures for EPUB3
Norm: I don't think we have to rush to publish it.
... There are two levels of encryption, a zip file can contain encrypted
or it can contain encrypted items.
Jim: What happens if you have more documents on the source port than you
specify in the manifest.
... Is that an error? Do we want to add an option?
Norm: I'd be content with either it's an error or they get ignored.
Some discussion of how to zip files that are sitting on disk.
Some discussion of the src attribute on the zip:entry
Jim observes that it's not finished; he just had some questions.
Jim: If we're going to publish this before V.next; we'll have to make it
work with V.next.
... but we can republish it after V.next, right?
Norm: Yes.
Alex: Is there a simple zip that we could put in here that would work
today?
Norm rambles about some of the open questions
<jfuller_> I think we can make a 'simple' example of zip that satisfies
Alex's concern
Vojtech: The zip step is different from p:store or p:xsl-formatter; it
returns something different.
... In V.next we might want to return the binary data from those steps as
well.
... Maybe we should do the same thing from p:zip, just return a URI that
points to the ZIP file.
Norm: I could live with that.
... We do need a p:zip-manifest step (or an option on p:unzip) that
returns the manifest.
Bug 20995
-> [19]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20995
Jim: I'm not sure there is an answer.
Alex: I still maintain that it will be true during the execution of that
XPath expression.
... And if it's evaluated later, it'll be true during that expression as
well, even if it's different from the first time.
... If I store a document and then later load it, do I get the same
document.
Norm: In XSLT, you can't produce two xsl:result-documents with the same
URI, but we don't impose that limitation.
Alex: If the execution context is each individual step, then you get the
expected results.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to make this point as a comment in bug 20995.
[recorded in [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
Bug 21002
-> [21]https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21002
<p:pipeline version='1.0' name="pipeline"
xmlns:p="http://www.w3.org/ns/xproc">
<p:option name="opt" required="true"/>
<p:identity/>
</p:pipeline>
Vojtech: For the outer pipeline, this isn't really a static check.
Norm: The outer-most evaluation is certainly special.
Vojtech: In the command-line case, it's certainly on the boundary between
the static evaluation phase and the run phase.
Alex: It would be nice to leave it open to implementors.
... At minimum it should be a dynamic error.
Norm: I don't want to make it a dynamic error.
Vojtech: We could say it's a static error not to pass an option.
Norm: I propose that we remove the word invoke and add a note that says
that the top-level execution is a little bit special
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to comment on 21002 with proposed wording. [recorded
in [22]http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
Vojtech: We could say that the top level case is conceptually the same as
having a pipeline that imports your pipeline and runs it.
Norm: I'm hoping we don't need to go to that level of detail.
Any other business?
Adjourned.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to comment on 21002 with proposed wording. [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Norm to make this point as a comment in bug 20995. [recorded
in [24]http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [25]scribe.perl version 1.137 ([26]CVS
log)
$Date: 2013-03-20 15:12:42 $
References
1. http://www.w3.org/
2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-agenda
3. http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-irc
4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#agenda
5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item01
6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item02
7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item03
8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item04
9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item05
10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item06
11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item07
12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item08
13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#item09
14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-minutes#ActionSummary
15. http://www.w3.org/XML/Processing/
16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/20-agenda
17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xproc-zip_unzip.html
18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2013/03/13-minutes
19. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20995
20. http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action01
21. https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21002
22. http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action02
23. http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action02
24. http://www.w3.org/2013/03/20-xproc-minutes.html#action01
25. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
26. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 15:14:36 UTC