IRC log of xproc on 2006-04-13
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:53:01 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #xproc
- 14:53:02 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/04/13-xproc-irc
- 14:53:02 [MSM]
- zakim, this will be xml_proc
- 14:53:02 [Zakim]
- I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, MSM
- 14:53:07 [MSM]
- zakim, conferences?
- 14:53:07 [Zakim]
- I don't understand your question, MSM.
- 14:53:12 [MSM]
- zakim, what conferences?
- 14:53:12 [Zakim]
- I see SVG_WG()9:30AM, WAI_Team()10:45AM, MWI_BPWG()10:00AM active
- 14:53:13 [Zakim]
- also scheduled at this time are VB_VBWG()10:00AM, DIG_TAMI()11:00AM, DI_DIWG(dpf)10:00AM, I18N_Core_WG(WS-I18N)11:00AM, SW_HCLS()11:00AM, HTML_XForms()10:00AM, WS_DescWG()11:00AM,
- 14:53:16 [Zakim]
- ... Team_Global(review)8:00AM, XML_PMWG()11:00AM, WS_DescWG(WSDL)10:00AM
- 14:53:25 [MSM]
- zakim, this will be xml_pm
- 14:53:25 [Zakim]
- ok, MSM; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
- 14:53:41 [Norm]
- Norm has joined #xproc
- 14:54:03 [Norm]
- zakim, this will be xproc
- 14:54:03 [Zakim]
- ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
- 14:54:14 [rlopes]
- rlopes has joined #xproc
- 14:54:39 [MSM]
- norm, to answer your question of (when? two days ago?) 2051213 does conform to ISO 8601, to one of its many formats
- 14:55:03 [MSM]
- 8601 also defines a format with hyphens, which is the one required by XSD
- 14:55:27 [Norm]
- Thanks, MSM
- 14:55:49 [MSM]
- (when I first started using iso dates, I invariably used hyphens to make them clearer to myself, but as time passed I grew more comfortable parsing the hyphenless form.)
- 14:56:26 [MSM]
- Norm, I'm going to step away from my desk to feed the dogs, but will take my phone with me; if you would ask Zakim to call Michael-Office, when the call starts, I'd be grateful.
- 14:57:43 [Norm]
- Sure
- 14:59:52 [Zakim]
- XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
- 14:59:59 [Zakim]
- +Norm
- 15:00:14 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 15:00:24 [Norm]
- zakim, ipcaller is rlopes
- 15:00:25 [Zakim]
- +rlopes; got it
- 15:00:32 [Norm]
- Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
- 15:00:33 [Norm]
- Scribe: Norm
- 15:00:33 [Norm]
- ScribeNick: Norm
- 15:00:33 [Norm]
- Date: 13 Apr 2006
- 15:00:33 [Norm]
- Chair: Norm
- 15:00:33 [Norm]
- Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/04/13-agenda.html
- 15:01:10 [Alessandro]
- Alessandro has joined #xproc
- 15:01:21 [Zakim]
- +MoZ_
- 15:01:23 [AndrewF]
- AndrewF has joined #xproc
- 15:01:46 [Norm]
- zakim, call micheal-office
- 15:01:46 [Zakim]
- I am sorry, Norm; I do not know a number for micheal-office
- 15:01:47 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 15:01:51 [Norm]
- zakim, call michael-office
- 15:01:51 [Zakim]
- ok, Norm; the call is being made
- 15:01:53 [Zakim]
- +Michael
- 15:01:58 [Norm]
- zakim, ipcaller is Alessandro
- 15:01:58 [Zakim]
- +Alessandro; got it
- 15:02:04 [Zakim]
- +??P26
- 15:02:10 [Norm]
- zakim, ??p26 is AndrewF
- 15:02:10 [Zakim]
- +AndrewF; got it
- 15:02:30 [MoZ]
- Zakim, MoZ_ is MoZ
- 15:02:30 [Zakim]
- +MoZ; got it
- 15:02:57 [Norm]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:02:57 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Norm, rlopes, MoZ, Alessandro, Michael, AndrewF
- 15:03:05 [Norm]
- zakim, who's making noise?
- 15:03:15 [Zakim]
- Norm, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: MoZ (4%), AndrewF (4%)
- 15:03:16 [Norm]
- sort-lines
- 15:03:46 [Norm]
- zakim, mute micheal
- 15:03:46 [Zakim]
- sorry, Norm, I do not see a party named 'micheal'
- 15:03:48 [MoZ]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:03:48 [Zakim]
- MoZ should now be muted
- 15:03:50 [Norm]
- zakim, mute michael
- 15:03:50 [Zakim]
- Michael should now be muted
- 15:03:52 [Zakim]
- +Alex_Milowski
- 15:05:02 [alexmilowski]
- alexmilowski has joined #xproc
- 15:05:29 [Norm]
- zakim, alex_milowski is alexmilowski
- 15:05:29 [Zakim]
- +alexmilowski; got it
- 15:05:55 [Norm]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:05:55 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Norm, rlopes, MoZ (muted), Alessandro, Michael (muted), AndrewF, alexmilowski
- 15:06:20 [Norm]
- Present: Norm, Rui, Mohamed, Alessandro, Michael, Andrew, Alex
- 15:06:30 [Norm]
- Regrets: Henry, Paul, Richard
- 15:06:31 [MoZ]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:06:31 [Zakim]
- MoZ should no longer be muted
- 15:06:45 [Norm]
- Topic: Accept this agenda?
- 15:06:45 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/04/13-agenda.html
- 15:06:53 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:06:57 [Norm]
- Topic: Accept minutes from the previous teleconference?
- 15:06:57 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/04/06-minutes.html
- 15:07:04 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:07:14 [Norm]
- Topic: Next meeting: 20 Apr telcon
- 15:07:14 [Norm]
- Any regrets?
- 15:07:34 [Norm]
- Rui gives regrets for 20 and 27 April
- 15:07:52 [Norm]
- Topic: Are components side-effect free?
- 15:07:55 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3096
- 15:10:04 [MoZ]
- yep
- 15:10:06 [Norm]
- Alex: Couldn't we take the XSLT approach and not say?
- 15:10:51 [Norm]
- Norm: XSLT assumes that they are side effect free, can we assume the same?
- 15:11:11 [Norm]
- Alex: If you want a side-effect, pass the stuff through the pipeline.
- 15:11:33 [Norm]
- Alex: Something that goes around the back and passes a note can't be prevented
- 15:11:34 [MoZ]
- side effect free is intimately related to management of resources
- 15:12:05 [Norm]
- Alex: If parameter are a separate thing, then you could imagine a step that sets parameters.
- 15:12:46 [Norm]
- Alex: I'm not sure we know enough about the whole structure to know how to resolve this
- 15:13:03 [MSM]
- q+
- 15:13:12 [MSM]
- zakim, Michael is MSM
- 15:13:13 [Zakim]
- +MSM; got it
- 15:13:24 [Norm]
- Alex: Is it sufficient to say for now that we don't want to encourage side effects?
- 15:13:29 [MSM]
- ack MSM
- 15:13:46 [Alessandro]
- q+
- 15:14:10 [Norm]
- MSM: I wonder if it would do the trick to say, if there are side-effects their order and number of times they occur is undefined.
- 15:14:34 [Norm]
- MSM: If you know the order of side effects is going to be ok, then you know something that this spec and this implementation are not obligated to tell you
- 15:14:46 [Norm]
- MSM: "It's your problem"
- 15:14:48 [Norm]
- ack Alessandro
- 15:15:23 [Norm]
- Alessandro: What is the definition of a side-effect in this discussion?
- 15:15:26 [MoZ]
- Zakim, mute me
- 15:15:26 [Zakim]
- MoZ should now be muted
- 15:15:37 [MSM]
- s/that this spec and this implementation are not/that this spec does not and this implementation is not/
- 15:15:42 [Norm]
- Alessandro: Given the same input documents, a transformation might produce different outputs
- 15:16:08 [MSM]
- zakim, who is making noise?
- 15:16:19 [Zakim]
- MSM, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds
- 15:16:28 [Norm]
- Alessandro: And I see a lot of components that would be useful, to fetch things from a database or web service for example, where it would be hard to gaurantee no side effects
- 15:17:37 [Norm]
- Norm: I want it to be the case that if you pass the same inputs to a component, you will get the same result. Or that an engine is free to return the same result.
- 15:17:54 [Norm]
- MSM: In that formulation, I have a lot more sympathy
- 15:19:35 [MoZ]
- imagine the information of the time and date
- 15:20:43 [Norm]
- Norm expresses again his desire to be able to cache results
- 15:22:01 [MoZ]
- he that's my sample :)
- 15:22:14 [Norm]
- s/he/hey/
- 15:23:19 [MoZ]
- Norm, XSLT is a functionnal language
- 15:24:06 [MSM]
- [MSM thinks the discussion is not sufficiently clear in distinguishing the cases where (a) side-effect-free ness is required and (b) it is allowed and (c) it's not allowed (whatever that might mean)
- 15:24:10 [MSM]
- ]
- 15:24:17 [MoZ]
- Norm, +1 for default is side effect free
- 15:25:52 [Norm]
- Alessandro: What is the value of saying components are side-effect free? Unspoken benefit is related to caching, which I support. But it looks like the type of side-effect free language we are thinking about would only have an implication on caching on running the same steps multipe times in the same pipeline
- 15:25:56 [MoZ]
- Alessandro, not just caching but also intrepreting the structure
- 15:26:06 [Norm]
- Alessandro: I don't see that case as happening very often
- 15:26:41 [Norm]
- Alessandro: Is this really the case we're talking about?
- 15:27:16 [MoZ]
- good example is cocoon expire parameter
- 15:27:17 [Norm]
- Alessandro: The case I see more often is that you run the same pipeline multiple times and you want to cache results across multiple executions.
- 15:28:05 [Norm]
- Norm: Good point.
- 15:28:37 [Norm]
- Norm wonders if we should just move on?
- 15:28:39 [MoZ]
- +1 for later resolution
- 15:29:55 [Norm]
- Topic: Issue 3113: Does the pipeline act as a resource manager?
- 15:30:04 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3113
- 15:30:15 [Norm]
- Alex: The MT pipeline, and my pipeline, both do this
- 15:30:26 [Norm]
- Alex: It's a nice thing
- 15:31:09 [Norm]
- Alex: I'm not sure this is something we have to define
- 15:32:56 [Norm]
- Norm describes a case with a serialized URI that's later xsl:imported in a stylesheet
- 15:33:53 [MoZ]
- this case is for me a good example of optimization of a pipeline : if the user don't optimize he do want you say and for the pipeline they are different
- 15:34:09 [MoZ]
- if he want to optimize he uses label
- 15:34:31 [MoZ]
- in that case we could even use event
- 15:34:38 [Norm]
- Alex: I think this should have to be explicit.
- 15:36:57 [MoZ]
- Zakim, unmute me
- 15:36:57 [Zakim]
- MoZ should no longer be muted
- 15:37:19 [Norm]
- Alex: We could make it possible to bind these implicit inputs in an explicit way.
- 15:39:09 [Norm]
- More discussion :-/
- 15:40:13 [Norm]
- Norm: I'm concerned about the complexity of designing a mechanism for making these things explicit and the overhead of deploying that mechanism everytime it's needed
- 15:40:55 [MoZ]
- we could imagine if it is not explicit we could just make simple deduction, if information is explicit we could make stronger deduction
- 15:41:33 [Norm]
- Alex: This is a binding from URIs to infosets. Is this something that always happens or do you have to say something in the pipeline to make this explicit
- 15:42:42 [Norm]
- Norm: I don't hear us driving towards consensus on this one
- 15:43:04 [Norm]
- Alex: We should put that use case in the issue
- 15:43:34 [Norm]
- Alex: We have to decide soon what sort of access you have to inputs/outputs other than through pipes
- 15:44:36 [Norm]
- Topic: Issue 3114: Are explicit dependencies required
- 15:44:43 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3114
- 15:46:13 [Norm]
- Norm attempts to describe the situation
- 15:46:19 [Norm]
- Norm: (badly)
- 15:46:32 [MoZ]
- Norm, not so bad
- 15:46:43 [Norm]
- Alex: For streaming to work, you need to know all the dependencies
- 15:47:32 [MoZ]
- if graph is not unique we should issue a warning
- 15:47:35 [Norm]
- Alex: We need to be able to construct the graph and if the resource manager plays games with that graph, we need to know
- 15:48:12 [Norm]
- Norm: Maybe this issue depends on our resolution of 3113
- 15:49:12 [MoZ]
- i think the are related 3113 and 3114 but in both way
- 15:49:19 [Norm]
- Norm: If you have a mechanism, as Alex suggested, to make the resource manager explicit, then this issue is subsumed
- 15:49:20 [MoZ]
- s/the/they/
- 15:49:25 [Norm]
- Alex: They're related, not necessarily subsumed.
- 15:50:16 [Norm]
- Alex: I'd suggest that we start here.
- 15:51:39 [Norm]
- Norm isn't sure how to start here
- 15:52:01 [Norm]
- Norm: If you don't care about side effects and you don't have a resource manager, then when do you ever need dependencies other than inputs and outputs?
- 15:52:40 [Norm]
- Alex: depending on a URI is a kind of input/output that isn't directly related to flow through the pipeline
- 15:53:51 [Zakim]
- -Alessandro
- 15:54:25 [Zakim]
- +Alessandro_Vernet
- 15:54:57 [Norm]
- Norm: So you could have inputs/outputs and a facility for describing auxilliary inputs, resources that are produced/consumed, identified by URI
- 15:56:07 [Norm]
- Alex: Yes
- 15:56:47 [Norm]
- Norm wonders how to deal with dynamic resources in this model
- 15:57:56 [Norm]
- Norm: How are inputs distinct from resources consumed or outputs and resources produced?
- 15:58:17 [Norm]
- Alex: I'm not sure there's a lot of difference, but it comes into play in streaming
- 15:58:41 [Norm]
- Alex: The inputs/outputs in the MT pipeline were important for determining thread boundaries
- 15:59:02 [Norm]
- Alex: I should be able to deduce optimizations from a good flow graph
- 15:59:38 [Norm]
- Topic: Any other business?
- 15:59:40 [Norm]
- None
- 15:59:57 [MSM]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:59:57 [Zakim]
- MSM should no longer be muted
- 16:00:04 [Zakim]
- -rlopes
- 16:00:06 [Zakim]
- -alexmilowski
- 16:00:08 [Zakim]
- -AndrewF
- 16:00:10 [Zakim]
- -Alessandro_Vernet
- 16:00:11 [Zakim]
- -MoZ
- 16:00:22 [rlopes]
- rlopes has left #xproc
- 16:05:04 [Zakim]
- -Norm
- 16:05:14 [Zakim]
- -MSM
- 16:05:16 [Zakim]
- XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
- 16:05:17 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Norm, rlopes, Alessandro, AndrewF, MoZ, alexmilowski, MSM, Alessandro_Vernet
- 16:05:32 [Norm]
- rrsagent, set logs world-visible
- 16:05:37 [Norm]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:05:37 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/04/13-xproc-minutes.html Norm
- 16:14:56 [alexmilowski]
- alexmilowski has left #xproc
- 18:03:47 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #xproc
- 18:07:22 [Norm]
- Norm has joined #xproc