Fwd: Venue of XProc Workshop

Hi all,

> Am 15.12.2016 um 08:49 schrieb David Maus <maus@hab.de>:
> 
> My main challenge with the current situation is that it is hard for me
> to figure out which errata or bugs of the 1.0 spec a) exist und b) had
> already been discussed and/or fixed while drafting the 2.0 spec and c)
> are dealt with in Calabash and/or Morgana.

I am currently having the same troubles. 
@Norm: Is it possible and would it help to raise the issues from https://github.com/xproc/1.0-specification/tree/xproc20/langspec/xproc20
to xproc/1.1-specification? To my reading the two versions are almost identical, so the issues on A should also be issues on B.

> 
> @Achim & Gerrit: Could I ask you to create issues for the
> interoperability problems you discussed in your XML London 2016 Paper?
I will do this during the holidays. If I remember right, most of them are dealing with exproc-steps, but there are at least two related to the standard step library.

From my memory the biggest point with regard to the core specs is interoperability of „p:import". The two processors may know the same step/libraries, but use different uris to access them. I think we should fix this, but currently I have different ideas how to do this. Promise to come up with a proposal in Prague!

See you in Prague!

Achim
------------------------------------------------
Achim Berndzen
achim.berndzen@xml-project.com

http://www.xml-project.com

Received on Friday, 16 December 2016 17:34:46 UTC