IRC log of xproc on 2006-06-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:54:51 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
14:54:51 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:55:02 [ht]
Meeting: XML Processing model telcon
14:55:23 [ht]
Chair: Henry S Thompson
14:55:39 [ht]
Scribe: Henry S Thompson
14:55:53 [ht]
ScribeNick: ht
14:57:32 [ht]
Topic: Attendance
14:58:52 [Alessandro]
Alessandro has joined #xproc
14:59:02 [Alessandro]
Alessandro has left #xproc
15:00:02 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:00:15 [Alessandro]
Alessandro has joined #xproc
15:00:35 [Zakim]
15:00:57 [rlopes]
rlopes has joined #xproc
15:01:04 [ht]
zakim, please call ht781
15:01:06 [Zakim]
I am sorry, ht; I do not know a number for ht781
15:01:10 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:01:10 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:01:12 [Zakim]
15:01:27 [Zakim]
15:01:28 [Zakim]
15:01:29 [Alessandro]
Zakim, [IP is Alessandro
15:01:29 [Zakim]
+Alessandro; got it
15:02:26 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
15:02:57 [Zakim]
15:02:59 [richard]
zakim, ? is richard
15:02:59 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
15:03:58 [ht]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:03:58 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MoZ, Alex_Milowski, Ht, Murray_Maloney, Alessandro, richard
15:04:42 [ht]
15:05:02 [ht]
15:05:07 [rlopes]
yes, but the bridge is stating "invalid pass"
15:05:21 [MoZ]
Zakim, what is the code ?
15:05:21 [Zakim]
the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), MoZ
15:05:22 [ht]
do the # thing to get amy then, don't waste time. . .
15:05:32 [rlopes]
15:06:46 [ht]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:06:46 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MoZ, Alex_Milowski, Ht, Murray_Maloney, Alessandro, richard
15:06:57 [Zakim]
15:07:13 [ht]
zakim, +[ is rlopes
15:07:13 [Zakim]
sorry, ht, I do not recognize a party named '+['
15:07:17 [rlopes]
Zakim, [IP is Rui
15:07:17 [Zakim]
+Rui; got it
15:08:00 [ht]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:08:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MoZ, Alex_Milowski, Ht, Murray_Maloney, Alessandro, richard, Rui
15:08:16 [ht]
Topic: Agenda
15:08:55 [ht]
15:09:07 [ht]
Topic: Minutes of 2006-06-15
15:09:17 [ht]
No comment, silence gives consent, accepted.
15:09:32 [ht]
Topic: Call next week
15:09:50 [ht]
MM regrets for 29 June and 6 July
15:10:09 [ht]
RT regrets for 6 and 13 July
15:10:25 [ht]
Topic: F2F 2--4 August
15:10:59 [ht]
Accommodation is going fast, if you're not booked, do so ASAP!
15:11:35 [ht]
MM: Rocklin Inn is closest to the meeting venue at MM's
15:11:47 [ht]
... Estimating 9 participants
15:12:21 [ht]
Topic: Review of open action items
15:12:38 [ht]
No progress on any of the open items
15:13:24 [ht]
Topic: Syntax of the pipeline language
15:13:41 [ht]
15:14:30 [ht]
HST: Three levels for names:
15:14:42 [ht]
1) The pipeline itself ;
15:14:54 [ht]
2) Components may declare required parameters
15:15:09 [ht]
3) Authors may need variables to park things in
15:15:39 [ht]
AM's email directly addresses (3)
15:16:08 [ht]
HST: Does AM's proposal also address (2)?
15:16:53 [ht]
RT: 4th category has been discussed -- XSLT parameters -- not required by component or pipeline, but used in a particular stylesheet, for example
15:17:09 [alexmilowski]
15:17:32 [ht]
HST: Yes, that's a separate use case, and AM's mechanism addresses it
15:18:17 [ht]
MM: Late binding on the table? E.g. bind 'foo' to date, at pipeline invocation or only as referenced
15:18:59 [ht]
AM: Been discussed. . .dynamic binding at a particular point, but not re-evaluated thereafter
15:19:36 [ht]
... but lazy values not as such
15:20:06 [MoZ]
for me only functions can give different results
15:20:07 [ht]
RT: User needs to do that explicitly, with e.g. a small component which produces the current date/time in an small XML document
15:20:45 [MoZ]
date() for date and current() for current node for example
15:20:47 [ht]
AM: I think we agreed no iteration of a 'while (condition) ...' variety for v1, so, no
15:20:59 [ht]
ack alex
15:21:38 [ht]
AM: My email, and HST's simple pipeline -- let+params+vars makes simple progress from that
15:22:01 [ht]
RT: While working on conditional for my simple syntax proposal, same problems come up
15:22:22 [ht]
q+ to put two kinds of 'values' on the table
15:23:03 [ht]
AM: This topic actually involves the larger question of flow vs. sequence semantics. . .
15:23:25 [ht]
... If there's a primary input, my proposal works as written
15:23:59 [ht]
... If that can't be assumed, then things get more complicated
15:24:02 [ht]
ack ht
15:24:02 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to put two kinds of 'values' on the table
15:24:56 [richard]
15:27:40 [ht]
HST: Two kinds of named values: constants, or simple values pulled via XPath from documents on the one hand, and (sequences of) infosets on the other
15:28:08 [ht]
... Should these both use the same kind of binding mechanism? They don't in the sum of the proposals on the table at the moment
15:28:41 [ht]
RT: The first thing to note about this example, somewhat irritatingly, is that the conditional itself has to declare a name for its output
15:29:57 [ht]
... Assumes as have others that default context for XPaths is the primary input
15:30:58 [ht]
... A bit verbose as it stands, but if we allow the default rule that w/o an explicit input, you get the primary output of the previous step, etc.
15:31:47 [ht]
... So here we have a name being 'bound' by the conditional -- e.g. the 'result' of the conditional
15:33:00 [ht]
... So last week we observed that we have components defining names, and steps binding those names
15:33:22 [ht]
... But pipelines themselves do both
15:33:44 [ht]
... Conditional is similar -- it both names the output _and_ binds something to it in each branch
15:34:29 [ht]
... Perhaps we should separate out the idea of scopes within which names exist, and binding of values to names
15:34:57 [ht]
AM: Several issues -- two-part names, or full hierarchical
15:36:28 [ht]
... We could go all the way to a path-like name which lets you address any step by navigating to it, or we could just use the ordinary ID/IDREF story
15:36:56 [ht]
... What I don't like is having to use paths for names depending on what the pipeline looks like
15:36:57 [ht]
15:37:14 [MSM]
MSM has joined #xproc
15:37:39 [ht]
RT: Well, I didn't want to have to make up names for every output of every step
15:39:49 [ht]
HST, RT: Steps are instances of components
15:40:15 [ht]
... The XSLT _component_ has a 'member' called 'stylesheet'
15:40:57 [ht]
... So every XSLT _step_ gives us a name [step-name].stylesheet, for the stylesheet for the named step
15:41:29 [ht]
HST: It's always only a two-part name, never a richer path. . .
15:43:04 [ht]
AM: I think of steps using components, which doesn't seem to be consistent with what you have above, but that's actually a distraction at this point
15:43:13 [ht]
... I also don't like the '.' separator
15:44:06 [ht]
... Worried that once we start including pipelines inside pipelines, etc., we'll need a general reference mechanism
15:45:06 [ht]
RT: Don't think we should allow that -- if you want to get at an input or output of a sub-pipe, the sub-pipe itself has to expose that at the sub-pipe surface
15:46:02 [ht]
AM: You're missing the lesson from XML Schema -- you need to be able to refer to every part of the complex structure, for example for debugging, documenting, labelling intermediate results, etc.
15:46:56 [ht]
RT: I see what you're saying, so yes, the naming approach I've proposed could generalize to pipe.step.port, etc.
15:47:18 [ht]
... There's some potential for confusion between step names and port names, in that case . . .
15:47:41 [ht]
AM: I also want names for inputs, even if the pipeline _language_ doesn't need them
15:48:01 [ht]
RT: Yes, again, can do, as long as we're careful wrt namespaces
15:48:27 [ht]
AM: So we need to step back and generalize -- carefully consider what we want to be able to name, in general
15:48:39 [ht]
... and build it in from the beginning
15:49:24 [ht]
RT: Indeed, and that's an argument for scoped names, and against ID/IDREF, otherwise composition might produce conflict
15:49:57 [ht]
MM: Multiple dots?
15:50:21 [ht]
RT: Only one in the language itself, but multiple for addressing 'from outside' as it were
15:50:53 [ht]
MM: Public vs. private? You're proposing inputs and outputs are public, what about variable?
15:51:11 [ht]
RT: In the language, as I'm proposing, only outputs are 'public' in that sense
15:52:07 [ht]
AM: I agree with MM, referring to vars and params still need ways to point to them, so you can ask about them
15:54:02 [ht]
MM: [book example which the scribe didn't catch -- please put in email!]
15:54:28 [ht]
RT: You seem to be adding dependency on values, as well as documents
15:54:39 [ht]
q+ to say blackboard
15:55:24 [alexmilowski]
15:56:03 [ht]
MM: ... I'm going to record something in a set of variables, each with a different, but related, name, one per chapter
15:58:00 [ht]
ack ht
15:58:00 [Zakim]
ht, you wanted to say blackboard
15:58:04 [ht]
ack alex
15:58:56 [ht]
MM has responded to RT's component example by email, please have a look
15:58:59 [Zakim]
15:59:02 [Zakim]
15:59:04 [Zakim]
15:59:06 [Zakim]
15:59:07 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has left #xproc
15:59:08 [Zakim]
15:59:10 [Zakim]
15:59:10 [rlopes]
rlopes has left #xproc
16:00:24 [ht]
rrsagent, make logs world-visible
16:00:35 [ht]
rrsagent, produce minutes
16:00:35 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'produce minutes', ht. Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:02:15 [ht]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:02:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate ht
16:05:00 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Ht, in XML_PMWG()11:00AM
16:05:03 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
16:05:04 [Zakim]
Attendees were MoZ, Alex_Milowski, Ht, Murray_Maloney, [IPcaller], Alessandro, richard, Rui
16:08:22 [ht]
MoZ, only one 'm' in Mohamed ?
16:08:26 [ht]
for your name?
16:08:37 [ht]
or is the w3c database wrong?
17:59:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #xproc