- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 08:07:02 -0800
- To: XProc WG <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
I assume that we're not changing the F2F agenda to add a review of the requirements since we just did that. ;) On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > See http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes > > [1]W3C > > - DRAFT - > > XML Processing Model WG > > 05 Feb 2014 > > [2]Agenda > > See also: [3]IRC log > > Attendees > > Present > Norm, Alex, Vojtech, Henry, Jim > > 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: 19/20 Feb 2014 (face-to-face in Edinburgh). > 4. [8]Review of open action items > 5. [9]Publish XPP as a Working Group Note > 6. [10]Face-to-face agenda > 7. [11]Jim's SCXML review > 8. [12]Progress on 1.0 bugs > 9. [13]Any progress on step libraries > 10. [14]Review of requirements document > 11. [15]Any other business? > > * [16]Summary of Action Items > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Accept this agenda? > > -> [17]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-agenda > > Accepted. > > Accept minutes from the previous meeting? > > -> [18]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/01/29-minutes > > Accepted. > > Next meeting: 19/20 Feb 2014 (face-to-face in Edinburgh). > > Jim and Vojtech will attend remotely. Alex, Henry, Norm expected in > person. > > Review of open action items > > Publish XPP as a Working Group Note > > -> [19]http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles.html > > Norm: I propose to request publication of that document as a Working Group > Note, are there any objections? > > None heard. > > Face-to-face agenda > > -> > [20]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2014Feb/0010.html > > Norm: Any comments or proposes for changes? > > Alex: Shouldn't we start with a review of the existing requirements > document? > > Norm: I'll add that to the agenda > > Jim's SCXML review > > Norm: Thank you, Jim, for doing that review. > ... I think the net-net is that there's some similarity but sufficient > differences that there's probably no value in attempting to coordinate > more closely. > > Jim: The only overlap really is the executable content; they say a > processor may provide additional executable content. In theory you could > drop XProc in there. > ... There's some ambiguity in the spec wrt the context item; we could ask > them about that. They're also using XPath 1.0, but I don't see any reason > they couldn't upgrade. > > Norm: Ok, but do you want the WG to do that? > > Jim: I think we should send suggestions. > > <scribe> ACTION: A-252-01 Jim to draft a proposed response to the SCXML > WG. [recorded in > [21]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/05-xproc-minutes.html#action01] > > Progress on 1.0 bugs > > None reported. > > Any progress on step libraries > > Jim: I'm pretty much ready to republish the steps. > > Norm: Should we put that on the f2f agenda? > > Jim: Yes > > Norm: Ok. > > Review of requirements document > > -> [22]http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc-v2-req/ > > Any other business? > > Adjourned. > > Summary of Action Items > > [NEW] ACTION: A-252-01 Jim to draft a proposed response to the SCXML WG. > [recorded in [23]http://www.w3.org/2014/02/05-xproc-minutes.html#action01] > > [End of minutes] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version 1.138 ([25]CVS > log) > $Date: 2014-02-05 15:42:12 $ > > References > > 1. http://www.w3.org/ > 2. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-agenda > 3. http://www.w3.org/2014/02/05-xproc-irc > 4. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#agenda > 5. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item01 > 6. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item02 > 7. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item03 > 8. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item04 > 9. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item05 > 10. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item06 > 11. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item07 > 12. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item08 > 13. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item09 > 14. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item10 > 15. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#item11 > 16. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-minutes#ActionSummary > 17. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/02/05-agenda > 18. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2014/01/29-minutes > 19. http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/xml-proc-profiles.html > 20. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2014Feb/0010.html > 21. http://www.w3.org/2014/02/05-xproc-minutes.html#action01 > 22. http://www.w3.org/TR/xproc-v2-req/ > 23. http://www.w3.org/2014/02/05-xproc-minutes.html#action01 > 24. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm > 25. http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/ -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 16:07:33 UTC