14:42:25 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 14:42:25 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/10/12-xproc-irc 14:42:28 zakim, this will be xproc 14:42:28 ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 18 minutes 14:51:47 rlopes has joined #xproc 14:57:25 PGrosso has joined #xproc 14:57:26 Alessandro has joined #xproc 14:59:32 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started 14:59:39 +[ArborText] 15:00:21 +Alessandro_Vernet 15:00:23 +[IPcaller] 15:00:33 +Norm 15:00:33 Zakim, [IP is Rui 15:00:35 +Rui; got it 15:00:55 Zakim, what is the code ? 15:00:55 the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), MoZ 15:01:26 Norm has changed the topic to: XProc WG meets 12 Oct 2006: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/10/12-agenda.html 15:01:32 +??P34 15:01:37 Zakim, ?? is me 15:01:37 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 15:01:37 Date: 12 Oct 2006 15:01:37 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/10/12-agenda.html 15:01:37 Meeting: 39 15:01:38 Chair: Norm 15:01:38 +MoZ; got it 15:01:40 Scribe: Norm 15:01:42 ScribeNick: Norm 15:03:35 +Murray_Maloney 15:04:20 Zakim, who is here? 15:04:20 On the phone I see PGrosso, Rui, Alessandro_Vernet, Norm, MoZ, Murray_Maloney 15:04:23 On IRC I see Alessandro, PGrosso, rlopes, RRSAgent, Zakim, Norm, MoZ 15:04:44 ht has joined #xproc 15:04:56 zakim, please call ht-781 15:04:56 ok, ht; the call is being made 15:04:57 +Ht 15:04:59 richard has joined #xproc 15:05:28 +??P5 15:05:29 zakim, ? is richard 15:05:32 +richard; got it 15:05:47 AndrewF has joined #xproc 15:05:54 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:05:54 On the phone I see PGrosso, Rui, Alessandro_Vernet, Norm, MoZ, Murray_Maloney, Ht, richard 15:06:20 Present: Paul, Rui, Alessandro, Norm, Mohamed, Murray, Henry, Richard 15:06:40 Topic: Accept this agenda? 15:06:40 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/10/12-agenda.html 15:06:44 +??P9 15:06:49 zakim, ? is AndrewF 15:06:52 +AndrewF; got it 15:06:54 Present: Paul, Rui, Alessandro, Norm, Mohamed, Murray, Henry, Richard, Andrew 15:07:05 MSM has joined #xproc 15:07:18 http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/10/12-agenda.html 15:07:38 zakim, please call MSM-Office 15:07:38 ok, MSM; the call is being made 15:07:40 +MSM 15:07:46 Accepted, with Murray's addition of order of processing per the GRDDL WG 15:07:51 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 15:07:51 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/10/05-minutes.html 15:08:09 Present: Paul, Rui, Alessandro, Norm, Mohamed, Murray, Henry, Richard, Andrew, Michael 15:08:15 Accepted. 15:08:21 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 19 Oct 2006 15:08:35 No regrets given. 15:08:38 Topic: Review of open action items 15:08:56 Completion of table in requirements document; continued. 15:09:12 New ETA: November, 2006 15:09:42 Topic: Technical agenda 15:09:42 Continued discussion of step naming 15:10:07 s/step naming/scope of step names/ 15:10:47 Norm wonders if there was any consensus on scope of step names. None apparent. 15:10:58 Richard observes that the discussion went off on a tangent. 15:11:22 Richard: If you want to limit what ports can be connected, there are two ways: by limiting the scope of the names, and the other is by having other constraints. 15:11:38 ...The scope of step names is not necessarily the same as what connections can be made. 15:13:04 Norm wonders about the ambiguity of step names if you don't use scope of names to determine connections. 15:13:25 Richard: Right, you need to determine what names are in scope and say something about ambiguity. 15:14:10 Norm: Anyone want to do it by some other mechanism? 15:14:39 Richard: Scope of step names might not be sufficient in the following case: suppose that there was some construct such that you were allowed to connect to things in your grandparents but not your parents. 15:15:05 ...You would want to maintain the names in scope so that they could be passed through, but that would not be the constraint you'd want to use for connections. 15:15:44 Norm: I don't think it would be a problem if such a component was not possible in XProc. 15:16:19 Norm: WRT to scope of names, the only open issue is whether or not the order of siblings matters. 15:17:03 [MSM responds, much delayed, to Norm's question - no objection to trying to solve these problems by describing scope, but whether it works or not depends on how simply we can do it. If we can't describe the scope simply in XML terms, then either we need a different way to solve the problems or we need to change the scope rules.] 15:17:05 Norm: Are there others?