Public minutes XSLT WG Telcon 14 January 2016

Please find the (public) minutes in-between the agenda items.

Cheers,
Abel

> 
> From: Sharon Adler 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2016 5:28 PM
> To: XSL Working Group
> Subject: XSLT WG Telcon Agenda 14 January 2016 - one hour telcon
> 
> 60 minute Telcon -
> 
> ==========================================================
> ===============
> 
> The XSL WG will meet on Thursday, 14 January 2016 at the START TIME as
> follows:
> 
>   09:00 a.m. Pacific Standard US/Canada,
>   10:00 a.m. Mountain Standard US/Canada,
>   11:00 a.m. Central Standard US/Canada,
>   12:00 Eastern Standard US/Canada,
>   17:00 UK, and
>   18:00 for France, Germany, Sweden and Belgium
> 
> Joining WebEx calls:
> 
> 
> 
> AGENDA:
> 
> 
> Sharon will chair this week.
> 
> 1 Roll call - Need manual roll call

On the call:
Sharon
Anders
Norm
MSMcQ
Michael K
Luis
Florent (10 min later)
Abel

Regrets: Carine

> 
> 2 Assign minute-taker - need volunteer

Abel takes minutes.

> 
> 3 Approval of minutes:from XSLT Telcon -
>   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2015Dec/0006.html
>   https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-wg/2015Dec/0019.html
> 
> 
> 4 Action Items
> 

Skipped, see member-only minutes.

> 
> 5 Other administrative business
> 
> 5.1 Review of agenda - items to be added to Agenda?

Items to be added: mail Abel (2x: xsl:message and xsl:use-package)

xsl:message: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Jan/0000.html
Packages: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Jan/0002.html

SA asks scribe to remind her after the bugs. See bottom of these minutes: item 7.1 and 7.2


> 
> 5.2 Telcon schedule -
>     Meet 14, 21, 28 January; 4 February

Schedule accepted.

> 
> 5.3 Report on joint work - MKay
> 
> 5.3.1 See section Joint Agenda J4.4.1 Bug 29277 - [XP31] Evaluating 
> function calls does not mention evaluation of dynamic or static 
> function calls that have no FunctionBody.
> See joint minutes. Discussion will continue with completion of joint 
> action item.
> 
>        MK please provide summary of "fix" and what else needs to be done.

The WG briefly discussed the result of this bug report and how it influences XSLT. 

ABr explains that the change in the spec is related to binding DC to xsl:function dynamic function calls. The resolutions of the bug resolves ambiguities in the text. It is now clearly defined that the host language must  define how, and if, a DC is bound to a dynamic function call of stylesheet functions (functions defined with xsl:function). Since XSLT does not allow a context to be passed to such a function, there's nothing we need to update in the XSLT spec.

> 
> 5.3.2. Joint bug 29346
>   J4.4.2 Bug 29346 - [XP31] XPath-style currying, or the arrow operator,
>          may require a bit more specification
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29346

Not applicable to the XSL WG anymore.

> 
> 6 XSLT Draft
> 
> Published CR:   http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/CR-xslt-30-20151119/
> 

Discussion on test coverage: see member-only minutes.

> 7.0 Spec bugs since entering CR - first bug #29234
> 
> 29234  [xslt30ts] package-908
>   discussed at last meeting.  MK with action item.

Skipped for now, related action item still pending.

> 
> 29256  accept-041c - error XTSE3080
>   began discussion at last telcon. needs further discussion.

Abel is ok with narrowing the scope to what is reported in the original description in the bug and to create a new bug of what's mentioned in comment#1, which broadens the scope. Sharon proposes to discuss this separately on a following telcon.

RESOLUTION: MKay to resolve this bug with making it an error to have an abstract component in the final stylesheet whether or not it was referenced.

> 
> 29340  [XSLT30] missing production-rule references for XP31 
> productions in streamability rules
>        https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29340

MKay mentions this is EDITORIAL

No discussion took place.

> 
> 29342  [XSLT30] Arrow Expression streamability rules do not take 
> dynamic function calls into account
>     https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29342

MKay suggests to write the streamability rules in terms of existing rules after the lexical expression rewrite (see XP31) has been applied
ABr asks whether ParenthesizedExpr productions are covered this way
MKay confirms that the rewrite of expressions applies equally well to situations where ParentisizedExpr are part of the ArrowExpr

RESOLUTION: the WG agrees that the streamability rules for arrow expressions needs updating by using the lexical rewriting rules of XP31

> 
> 29351  [xslt 3.0] xs:evaluate: error with no error code
>     https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29351

MKay explained the bug report to the WG.

The WG agreed to the assessment made in the description of the bug report.

RESOLUTION: WG agrees with the proposed solution in comment#0


######################################

REMINDER: Items to be added to agenda: mail Abel (2x: xsl:message and xsl:use-package)

7.1) xsl:message, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Jan/0000.html

The WG discusses this mail, other WG members oppose to the change "at this stage"
MSMcQ original thought that the as-attribute workaround already existed
MSMcQ shares with the group his struggles from a programmer's perspective with different constructs creating document nodes or not, which still often causes issues even nowadays in everyday programming tasks. He would love to change this, but understands it is too late in the game to do so.

After short deliberation he agreed that a change here would yield too little for too much work and nothing was really broken. 

DECISION: do nothing

7.2) use-package: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Jan/0002.html

After some discussion of this mail the WG agrees that it would be beneficial to add some clarification

MSMcQ suggests the following:

In Appendix F.1 (impl defined features)
Change Item 4 by adding:
It is implementation defined what languages packages can be written in.

This may also need to be added to 3.5.2 somewhere around para 6.

SA asks if ABr can take a look for places in the spec where this needs to be fixed / altered and to suggest alternative wording for the editor and the WG to take a look at.

DECISION: a proposal will be made for a slight text clarification on the matter of implementation details of packages that will be discussed in a later telcon

The meeting was adjourned.

Received on Monday, 18 January 2016 19:43:06 UTC