- From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:08:26 -0700
- To: public-xsl-wg@w3.org
- Cc: "C. M. Sperberg-McQueen" <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com>
> 6. Email discussions. > 6.1 Invocation variants. > see https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-wg/2016Nov/0000.html > - the above is where the discussion began. > RE: apply-templates invocation > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xsl-wg/2016Nov/0015.html > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Nov/0006.html > same email sent to both lists - choose whichever pleases you to read! SCA noted that we have been avoiding 29827 and 29889; we need to keep them in mind as we discuss this. ABr walked us through his note. MK thought the proposal probably worked; he asked about the definition of eligible initial mode and how it interacts with the default-mode attribute on xsl:stylesheet. ACTION 2016-11-17-003: MK to implement the proposal in ABr's email [1] and ensure that it resolves bugs 19827 and 29889, or push back if he encounters problems. ETA 1 December 2016. [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xsl-wg/2016Nov/0006.html > 7. XSLT Draft > The diff version is at the usual location. > Published CR: http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/CR-xslt-30-20151119/ > Internal version: > https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/qtspecs/specifications/xslt-30/html/Overview.html > W3C Candidate Recommendation 9 November 2016 > Please do not announce on Public List. > 8. Spec bugs > 29790 [xslt30] Sample stylesheet for xml-to-json conversion uses a reserved > namespace > Reclassified as editorial - Bug left open until the revised > version is tested. > In process. > 29819 [XSLT30] (editorial) Core functions > People were asked to review G.1 (when the draft containing that > text becomes available). > Work in progress. ACTION 2016-11-17-004: MK to revisit bug 29819 (table in appendix G1) to see if he can improve the current solution; also update the bug. SCA asked members of the WG for comments. > 29827 [XSLT 3.0] Error XTDE0045 revisited > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29827 > More discussion related to invocation. Appears to be solved by the decision reported above on invocation variants. > 29889 [xslt30] Add clarifications on stylesheet invocation options > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29889 > More discussion related to invocation. Appears to be solved by the decision reported above on invocation variants. > 29978 [XSLT30] Update error XTSE0120 and XTSE0130 for packages > (xsl:package) and xsl:transform Sat 10:22 > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29978 > SCA closed after bug was marked that fix was applied. Skipped. > 29981 required="no" on additional tunnel parameters of overriding template > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29981 > review proposed text MK reported on the issue; he felt that the commentator had correctly located a usability issue which we can resolve by removing a restriction. Non-tunnel parameters must be the same, and tunnel parameters may be different. ABr asked whether tunnel parameters which have the same name need to be compatible. MK consulted his draft. ACTION 2016-11-17-005: MK to apply the changes described by bug 29981 as amended (namely: the set of tunnel parameters may differ, but if the overriding template has a tunnel parameter which matches a tunnel parameter on the overridden template in name, then the tunnel parameters must also match in type). RESOLVED: to resolve bug 29981 by adopting the proposal as amended (set of non-tunnel parameters must be the same; set of tunnel parameters must differ, but tunnel parameters present in b oth overridden template and overriding template must have same type). > 29982 [XSLT30] What is this Note, comparing tunnel params with variables > in functional languages referring to? > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29982 > Review proposed text RESOLVED: to approve the wording proposal in comment 3 of bug 29982. The wording is already in the spec, so no action needed. > 29983 [XSLT30] Scanning expressions and function calls > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29983 > Review - thanks Mike and Abel - much better. We discussed at length. We appeared to have consensus on what's in comment 3, but what's in comments 4ff needs further work. ACTION 2016-11-17-005: MK to rewrite proposal for bug 29983, taking comments 4 and following into account. At this point, the hour allotted for the call had elapsed and we adjourned for two weeks. > 29984 [XSLT30] Lessen the restraint on required raising of XTSE3430 for > constructs not guaranteed streamable per our rules > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29984 > Review and discuss > 29990 [XSLT30] result documents in temporary trees and in patterns as a > result of fn:transform calls > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29990 > Review > 9. Testing > 5 bugs open in bugzilla. > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29958 - does this need to > be discussed? > https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29958 ******************************************** C. M. Sperberg-McQueen Black Mesa Technologies LLC cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com http://www.blackmesatech.com ********************************************
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2016 19:08:56 UTC