IRC log of xproc on 2006-05-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:59:52 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
14:59:52 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:59:55 [Norm]
zakim, this will be xproc
14:59:55 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
14:59:56 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
15:00:03 [Zakim]
15:00:09 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:00:09 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:00:10 [Zakim]
15:00:41 [Zakim]
15:00:49 [Zakim]
15:01:43 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
15:02:08 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:02:09 [Norm]
zakim, who's on the phone?
15:02:09 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Murray_Maloney, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, Norm
15:02:16 [Zakim]
15:02:22 [Zakim]
15:02:40 [richard]
zakim, mute ??P19
15:02:40 [Zakim]
??P19 should now be muted
15:02:45 [Zakim]
15:02:46 [Norm]
Norm has changed the topic to: XProc:
15:02:49 [richard]
zakim, unmute ??P19
15:02:49 [Zakim]
??P19 should no longer be muted
15:02:57 [richard]
zakim, ??21 is richard
15:02:58 [Zakim]
sorry, richard, I do not recognize a party named '??21'
15:03:02 [richard]
zakim, ??P21 is richard
15:03:02 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
15:03:25 [richard]
yes we're talking
15:03:29 [ht]
zakim, disconnect ht
15:03:29 [Zakim]
Ht is being disconnected
15:03:30 [Zakim]
15:03:37 [rlopes]
zakim, ??P19 is Rui
15:03:37 [Zakim]
+Rui; got it
15:03:38 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:03:38 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:03:40 [Zakim]
15:03:42 [Norm]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
15:03:47 [Norm]
Scribe: Norm
15:03:49 [Norm]
ScribeNick: Norm
15:03:53 [Norm]
Date: 11 May 2006
15:03:58 [Norm]
Chair: Norm
15:04:08 [Norm]
15:05:27 [Norm]
zakim, who's on the phone?
15:05:27 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Murray_Maloney, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, Norm, richard, Rui, Alex_Milowski
15:06:29 [Norm]
Present: Murray, Norm, Henry, Alessandro, Richard, Rui, Alex
15:06:42 [Norm]
Regrets: Andrew, Michael, Paul
15:07:42 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #xproc
15:08:34 [MoZ]
Zakim, what is the code ?
15:08:34 [Zakim]
the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), MoZ
15:09:38 [Norm]
Topic: Accept this agenda?NE
15:09:38 [Norm]
15:09:50 [Norm]
15:09:56 [Norm]
Topic: Accept minutes from the previous teleconference?
15:09:56 [Norm]
15:10:05 [Norm]
15:10:15 [Norm]
Topic: Next meeting: 18 May 2006
15:10:29 [Norm]
Already regrets from: Andrew, Michael, Henry
15:10:48 [Norm]
Topic: Face-to-face
15:10:58 [Norm]
Please register:
15:11:07 [Norm]
Local arrangements:
15:11:32 [Norm]
Norm hopes we can nail down the transport next week.
15:11:44 [Norm]
Topic: Review of open action items
15:12:03 [Norm]
A-19-01 continued
15:12:10 [Norm]
A-19-02 completed
15:12:20 [Norm]
A-18-01 completed
15:12:32 [Norm]
A-17-02 completed
15:12:47 [Norm]
A-13-01 continued
15:13:03 [Norm]
ACTION: Norm to lookup revised ETA for A-13-01
15:13:16 [Norm]
Topic: Issue 3089: What version/subset of XPath is used in conditionals?
15:13:27 [Norm]
15:13:47 [Norm]
MoZ: are you trying to dial in and not gettting through the bridge?
15:15:11 [Zakim]
+ +
15:15:33 [Norm]
Norm: Three possibilities, 1) use someone else's streaming subset, 2) invent our own, 3) ues full XPath and leave it as a QoI issue
15:15:53 [richard]
zakim, who is talking?
15:16:04 [Zakim]
richard, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Norm (39%)
15:16:17 [Norm]
zakim, mute me
15:16:17 [Zakim]
Norm should now be muted
15:16:25 [Norm]
zakim, aaaa is moz
15:16:25 [Zakim]
+moz; got it
15:16:28 [Norm]
zakim, mute moz
15:16:28 [Zakim]
moz should now be muted
15:16:57 [Norm]
zakim, unmute me
15:16:57 [Zakim]
Norm should no longer be muted
15:17:42 [Norm]
Alex: Although I use a streaming subset, I think that's an optimization. I think we shouldn't have a subset.
15:18:43 [Norm]
Norm: I can find off-the-shelf full XPath 1.0 implementations, so I think that answer makes it easiest to get started
15:19:03 [Norm]
Norm: Is there anyone that thinks we need to define a subset?
15:19:16 [Norm]
Henry: I'm uncomfortable, but I'm willing to leave it for CR.
15:19:41 [Norm]
Norm: That works for me.
15:19:51 [Norm]
Richard: Do we have a good idea of what circumstances these XPaths are used in
15:20:17 [Norm]
Norm: Off the top of my head, we've got: conditionals, peepholing
15:20:24 [Norm]
Richard: Also the "replacement" component
15:20:43 [Norm]
Richard: It's possible that that's a component by itself.
15:20:59 [Norm]
Norm: so those wouldn't have to be the same.
15:21:18 [Norm]
Richard: I think I'm happy for it to be full XPath 1.0 and I can detect some streamable queries.
15:21:53 [Norm]
Proposal: We will use XPath 1.0 in our language
15:22:38 [Norm]
Allesandro: I think it will be interesting to have XPath 1.0 vs XPath 2.0 question
15:22:53 [Norm]
Alessandro: At least in the environment I am working in, off-the-shelf 2.0 implementations are easy to come by.
15:23:45 [Norm]
Norm: Do you have a use case in mind for pipeline conditionals?
15:23:50 [Norm]
Alessandro: Not off the top of my head
15:24:19 [Norm]
Alex: We could declare what version of XPath the pipeline uses and implementations can reject pipelines they can't support.
15:24:40 [Norm]
Richard: Isn't it the case that if you have XPath 2.0, you have to worry about whether the data has schema type and so on.
15:25:08 [Norm]
Richard: I know that there are XSLT 2.0 implementations that don't support the schema stuff and can give different answers.
15:25:39 [Norm]
Richard: If we introduce XPath 2.0 are we introducing new levels of conformance.
15:26:15 [Norm]
Norm: Yes, I think they would.
15:26:47 [Norm]
Norm: This seems useful and interesting, but not necessary.
15:27:16 [Norm]
Norm observes, in response to Richard, that having XPath 2.0 would mean that the pipeline engine would have to be able to import schemas
15:28:09 [Norm]
Alessandro: In environments where 2.0 is available, requiring XPath 1.0 seems like a burden
15:28:13 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #xproc
15:29:30 [Norm]
Norm prefers a single choice for interoperability
15:29:48 [Norm]
Alex: By the time we become a recommendation, we have to have a cohesive store around XSLT 2.0, XPath 2.0, XQuery, etc.
15:30:09 [Norm]
Alex: I don't think we can push that to, we need to come out with a recommendation that works well with those technologies.
15:30:13 [Norm]
Norm: Wow. Ok.
15:30:43 [Norm]
Norm worries that dealing with those things in 1.0 makes our goal of finishing this year hopeless.
15:32:29 [Norm]
Alessandro: I agree that there's complexity, but I think we should try just a little bit harder to try to accomodate schemas and XPath 2.0
15:32:45 [Norm]
Alessandro: It might be the case that we come to the conclusion that we can't do it in 1.0
15:33:15 [Norm]
Murray: I would tend to agree with Norm, let's do something we can accomplish in the timeframe we set out, even if it isnt' as grand and robust and wonderful as we might achieve in the fullness of time.
15:33:21 [Norm]
Murray: We can move onto the next stage afterwards.
15:33:45 [MoZ_]
MoZ_ has joined #xproc
15:34:39 [Norm]
Norm: Can Alex/Alessandro make some proposals to see if you can convince us that using schemas, XPath 2.0, etc. is achievable in our timeframe?
15:34:45 [Norm]
Alessandro: yes
15:34:51 [Norm]
Alex: yes
15:35:46 [Norm]
Proposal: We will assume full XPath, not a straming subset, in the language (unless and until we get pushback from implementors)
15:36:09 [Norm]
15:36:46 [Norm]
Topic: Issue 3198: Functional components?
15:36:57 [Norm]
15:37:05 [Zakim]
15:37:39 [Norm]
We've already made a decision about this, this issue is just for the future
15:37:55 [Norm]
Topic: Issue 3199: How do pipeline parameters, inputs, and outputs interact?
15:38:03 [Norm]
15:38:30 [MoZ_]
MoZ_ has joined #xproc
15:38:44 [Norm]
We don't really have any clear ideas about exactly how these things fit together yet
15:39:53 [Norm]
Norm reviews Richard's ideas that started this
15:40:02 [Norm]
Richard: Fundamentally, it must be possible to get some output into a parameter.
15:40:23 [Norm]
...The simplest way to define a parameter is to give a literal value.
15:40:49 [Norm]
...The next way up would be to give an XPath and the output of some other component to apply it to. It would evaluate the expression and the result would be the value of the variable
15:41:25 [Norm]
...So the temporary file component could generate a document and the XPath expression could be "."
15:41:35 [Norm]
...This means that all these things are connected by plumbing.
15:42:09 [Norm]
...Other people have mentioned at various times mechanisms for having variables that are in scope, etc. But I thnk the simple method is a good starting point.
15:43:51 [Norm]
Norm: I had in mind setting variables in general being specified with XPaths (so that pipeline parmams could be composed from command line params (for example) and others.
15:44:02 [Norm]
Norm: I was thinking of evaluating them all with an mepty document node as the context.
15:44:16 [Norm]
Norm: Extending that to allow them to specify an input document makes sense.
15:44:32 [Norm]
Norm: Is that sufficient?
15:45:06 [Norm]
Henry: It ought to be possible in a pipeline definition to say that the value of some step parameter is referred to at the pipeline level
15:45:13 [Norm]
Scribe isn't sure that he recorded Henry correctly
15:47:50 [Norm]
Norm: Parameters could have two attributes: value and select for literal values and XPath expressions
15:48:01 [Norm]
Some discussion about how these things get connected together syntactically.
15:48:16 [Norm]
Richard: I think the 90% case is that variables are constants. It's reasonable for it to be slightly complicated.
15:48:35 [Norm]
ACTION: Norm to write up his thoughts on parameters and inputs
15:48:53 [Norm]
Alex: This is related to the variables action that I have
15:49:35 [Norm]
Richard: It would be nice if this mechanism was extensible to being able to having different variables in scope in different parts of the pipeline.
15:49:46 [Norm]
Richard: But it's not immediately clear to me how it is. But maybe it is.
15:50:05 [MoZ_]
MoZ_ has joined #xproc
15:52:33 [Norm]
Topic: Any other business?
15:52:38 [Norm]
15:52:45 [Norm]
15:52:49 [Zakim]
15:52:50 [Zakim]
15:52:50 [Zakim]
15:52:52 [Zakim]
15:52:53 [Zakim]
15:52:53 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has left #xproc
15:52:56 [Zakim]
15:52:58 [rlopes]
rlopes has left #xproc
15:53:00 [Norm]
rrsagent, make logs world-visible
15:53:03 [Zakim]
15:53:04 [Norm]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:53:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Norm
15:53:05 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
15:53:07 [Zakim]
Attendees were Murray_Maloney, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, Norm, Alex_Milowski, richard, Rui, +, moz
15:53:09 [Norm]
zakim, bye
15:53:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #xproc
15:53:12 [Norm]
rrsagent, bye
15:53:12 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
15:53:12 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Norm to lookup revised ETA for A-13-01 [1]
15:53:12 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
15:53:12 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Norm to write up his thoughts on parameters and inputs [2]
15:53:12 [RRSAgent]
recorded in