15:58:26 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 15:58:26 logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/11/09-xproc-irc 15:58:32 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 15:58:32 Date: 9 Nov 2006 15:58:32 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/11/09-agenda.html 15:58:33 Meeting: 43 15:58:35 Chair: Norm 15:58:37 Scribe: Norm 15:58:39 ScribeNick: Norm 15:59:24 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started 15:59:31 +Norm 16:00:02 'k 16:00:15 +Alex_Milowski 16:00:25 +[ArborText] 16:00:30 +[IPcaller] 16:00:31 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 16:00:36 Zakim, [IP is me 16:00:36 +rlopes; got it 16:01:00 Alessandro has joined #xproc 16:01:20 PGrosso has joined #xproc 16:01:38 zakim, please call ht-781 16:01:38 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:01:40 +[IPcaller] 16:01:41 +Ht 16:01:44 Zakim, [IP is Alessandro 16:01:44 +Alessandro; got it 16:01:59 zakim, who's making noise? 16:02:10 Norm, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: 6 (0%) 16:02:17 richard has joined #xproc 16:02:22 Zakim, what is the code ? 16:02:22 the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), MoZ 16:02:24 zakim, mute Alessandro 16:02:24 Alessandro should now be muted 16:02:28 zakim, mute ht 16:02:28 Ht should now be muted 16:02:31 zakim, unmute Alessandro 16:02:34 Alessandro should no longer be muted 16:02:35 zakim, unmute ht 16:02:35 Ht should no longer be muted 16:02:49 ht? 16:02:52 zakim, hang up ht 16:02:52 I don't understand 'hang up ht', ht 16:02:53 zakim, please call MSM-Office 16:02:53 ok, MSM; the call is being made 16:02:54 +MSM 16:02:57 zakim, hang up ht. 16:02:57 I don't understand 'hang up ht', ht 16:02:59 +??P26 16:03:00 zakim, ? is me 16:03:00 +richard; got it 16:03:03 zakim, disconnect ht 16:03:03 Ht is being disconnected 16:03:04 -Ht 16:03:10 zakim, who's on the phone? 16:03:11 On the phone I see Norm, Alex_Milowski, PGrosso, rlopes, Alessandro, MSM, richard 16:03:21 zakim, please call ht-781 16:03:21 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:03:23 +Ht 16:03:40 zakim, who is making noise? 16:03:51 MSM, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Norm (24%) 16:03:56 funny, I'm not hearing anything 16:04:00 better now? 16:04:05 zakim, mute ht 16:04:05 Ht should now be muted 16:04:08 zakim, unmute ht 16:04:08 Ht should no longer be muted 16:04:16 -Ht 16:04:38 zakim, please call ht-781 16:04:38 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:04:40 +Ht 16:05:01 -Ht 16:05:07 zakim, please call ht-work 16:05:07 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:05:09 +Ht 16:05:37 +??P28 16:05:44 zakim, who's on the phone? 16:05:44 On the phone I see Norm, Alex_Milowski, PGrosso, rlopes, Alessandro, MSM, richard, Ht, ??P28 16:05:44 Zakim, ?? is me 16:05:48 +MoZ; got it 16:05:54 Present: Norm, Alex, Paul, Rui, Alessandro, Michael, Richard, Henry, Mohamed 16:06:02 Regrets: Andrew 16:06:21 Topic: Accept this agenda? 16:06:21 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/11/09-agenda.html 16:06:32 Accepted. 16:06:52 +Murray_Maloney 16:07:04 Present: Norm, Alex, Paul, Rui, Alessandro, Michael, Richard, Henry, Mohamed, Murray 16:07:24 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 16:07:24 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2006/11/02-minutes.html 16:07:46 Accepted. 16:07:46 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 16 Nov 2006 16:08:09 Michael possible regrets for 16 Nov 16:08:17 Topic: Technical agenda 16:08:53 Norm: The question of declare-* or not is the first big issue 16:09:10 Norm: Any strong feelings? 16:10:00 Henry: I liked the idea in the XML representation of XML Schema that we used the same element types for both declaring and referencing elements, attributes and a few other things. 16:10:20 ...In general, I have not found that to be a source of confusion, but it is occasionally critizised. 16:10:28 ...But I thought it was a good idea to keep them separate in our language. 16:10:35 Richard: I say get rid of them. 16:10:58 ...The divison between them doesn't seem to line up neatly enough. Sometimes declare means declare-and-use so there's no advantage in being explicit about it. 16:11:18 Henry: That's not true of parameters. 16:11:49 ...It's always the case that a given locus with respect to parameters is either a declaration or a binding, never both. 16:12:10 Norm: In the case where your assigning defaults, it looks exactly like declare-and-use 16:12:16 s/your/you're/ 16:12:30 Henry: I'm not sure I see it that way, but I understand how you might. 16:12:45 Henry: Is there value in keeping the distinction for parameter but not input/output? 16:12:53 Michael: Can someone type an example? 16:13:33 http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec-nodecl.html#ex.p.for-each 16:14:02 Uhm. no. 16:14:05 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/alternate/#ex.p.for-each 16:15:03 Norm: The input element both declares the existence of a port named "chap" and binds it to the given URI. 16:15:24 We need more examples. 16:15:52 when you speak of a port named "chapter", do you mean a port named "chap" ? 16:15:58 Henry: That's not quite right, viewport does more than that. But we tried hard to fix that in Ontario and didn't find a better proposal. 16:16:06 I don't see anything that looks like it's declaring a port named "chapter" 16:16:14 Yes, I meant to say "chap" 16:19:01 Micheal: It's not really a reference, it's an initializer. 16:19:07 Richard: You're right. It's assignment. 16:20:02 Consider: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/alternate/#dt-input-here 16:20:12 HST maintains that these things are a blend of input (source/href attrs) and declare-output (name attr) 16:20:38 Micheal: It seems to me that this mixture could lead an outside observer to believe that we don't have our fundamental notions well understood. 16:21:25 Henry: That's where we were in Ontario where we did finally get the semantics clear and agreed there were two things going on plus some special meanings, but that syntactically, it was obnoxious to have different bits of syntax to bear the different notions. 16:22:04 Micheal: I'm not understanding the distinctions. 16:22:19 Richard: The distinctions are in the attribute names and not in the element names. 16:22:40 ...It seems really strange to distinguish three cases with two different elements. 16:22:57 HST agrees with richard -- name= establishes something input ports can bind to, source/href/etc. bind to a document source 16:23:00 ...What we have now seems neither rigerous nor convenient. 16:23:43 Norm: I've heard some support for removing the declare-* forms, some "concurs", and no opposition. 16:23:43 [My instinct is that when things are semantically distinct they should have different GIs. 16:24:25 If that means we end up with a cumbersome syntax, then it sometimes means we aren't defining the right abtractions. 16:24:38 Norm: Shall we go with a draft that does not have the declare-* forms for publication on 17 November? 16:24:43 And sometimes it doesn't. I am not sure which class of case this is.] 16:24:47 s/Shall we/We shall/ 16:24:55 Accepted. 16:25:30 Norm: Any other issues that people feel must bee resolved before publication? 16:25:45 None heard. 16:27:00 Norm: Alex published a list of components this morning but it's unlikely that we'll have time to review them. Does anyone object to leaving them out of the 17 Nov draft? 16:27:05 Mohamed: I think we should put some of them in. 16:27:29 Murray: Would it be reasonable to produce a companion note that we can work on in parallel? 16:27:50 Norm: No, I don't think that's practical. 16:28:04 Richard: Looking through Alex's list, it appears that some are obviously good and some that need more discussion. 16:28:17 ...I think it would be good to put the most uncontroversial ones into the draft. 16:28:45 Henry: I nominate 1.1 through 1.6 with one change. 16:29:03 ...The change being that the XSLT component should be clear about what version of XSLT. 16:29:23 Norm: What about 1.7? 16:30:01 Henry: No, that raises security issues. 16:30:01 Alex: That's no different from the endpoints of a pipeline. 16:30:01 Henry: Yes it is, they're outside the spec. 16:30:13 Murray: I don't think we need firm agreement before we put something in the draft. 16:30:32 ...I think we should include it all if we're going to put it in. 16:30:35 Richard: I'm not sure I agree. 16:30:43 ...When we put the WD out, we want to really direct attention to the core of it. 16:31:30 PGrosso has joined #xproc 16:31:50 Richard: What about serialize and parse? 16:32:01 Alex: Yes, we've talked about them, but those are probably somewhat controversial. 16:33:45 Murray: There's a middle ground, include an editorial note to say which are firmer and which are softer. 16:34:12 Norm: Proposal: we incorporate 1.1-1.6 in the 17 November draft. 16:34:31 Murray: Point of order: Alex provided the whole list. 16:34:55 Murray: why are we rejecting the whole list? 16:35:07 Henry: I don't have any objection at all. 16:36:02 The scribe considers how to deal with this 16:37:09 Proposal: Include section 1 of Alex's component list in the 17 November draft. 16:37:28 Accepted. 16:37:30 Proposal: Include section 2 of Alex's component list in the 17 November draft. 16:37:49 Henry, Mohamed, Richard, object. Rejected. 16:37:56 Proposal: Include section 3 of Alex's component list in the 17 November draft. 16:38:25 Henry objects. 16:38:38 Richard: It has some value in that it shows quite different kinds of components. 16:38:51 Henry withdraws his objection. 16:38:59 Accepted. 16:39:14 Proposal: Include all of Alex's component list in the 17 November draft. 16:39:32 Henry objects. 16:40:38 Alex: What's wrong with section 2? 16:41:02 Richard: Section 1 has obvious things, section 3 has fairly straightforward things that are somewhat different, but section 2 has some controversial things. 16:41:17 s/tto/too 16:41:31 Mohamed: I suggest that we add 2.3. 16:41:48 Norm: The chair would prefer not to address individual cases for 17 Nov 16:42:28 Henry: What about parameters 16:42:49 s/parameters/parameters?/ 16:43:25 Henry: I'm not sure about Jeni's most recent post, but I think it should be possible to refer to parameters from other parameters. 16:44:07 ...Is it obvious that we can do that, and how? 16:44:07 Alex: It's not clear, but you do the $-thing. 16:44:10 Norm: I think that it's unclear, but that we did address it. 16:44:21 Henry: I'd like to encourage the editor to say something about that in the 17 Nov draft. 16:45:20 Alex: What about references to parameters declared on the same component? 16:45:29 Henry: I'd like to be able to make $x the default value for $y. 16:48:08 Norm proposes to deliver a new working draft by close-of-business (EST) on Tuesday that will be published on 17 November. Unless someone objects on the 16 Nov call, that draft will be published. 16:48:27 Accepted. 16:48:35 Topic: Any other business? 16:48:47 None. 16:48:47 Adjourned. 16:48:48 -PGrosso 16:48:51 -rlopes 16:48:52 -Alessandro 16:48:54 PGrosso has left #xproc 16:48:57 -Ht 16:48:58 -MSM 16:49:08 -richard 16:50:12 -MoZ 16:52:45 zakim, who's on the phone? 16:52:45 On the phone I see Norm, Alex_Milowski, Murray_Maloney 16:53:26 -Murray_Maloney 16:53:29 -Norm 16:53:31 -Alex_Milowski 16:53:32 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 16:53:34 Attendees were Norm, Alex_Milowski, [IPcaller], rlopes, PGrosso, Ht, Alessandro, MSM, richard, MoZ, Murray_Maloney 16:53:41 alexmilowski has left #xproc 16:55:43 rrsagent, please make logs world-visible 16:55:48 rrsagent, please draft minutes 16:55:48 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/11/09-xproc-minutes.html Norm 17:46:16 richard has joined #xproc 18:31:01 Norm? 18:32:39 Norm has joined #xproc 18:54:34 Norm? 18:54:40 yes 18:54:52 true or false? 18:54:55 yes 18:54:56 :-) 18:55:26 at the time of the dir decision call, (wiseguy), every spec which will ultimately be published at 18:55:56 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/(.*)20061121/Overview.html 18:55:59 will be at 18:56:31 http:http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/11/qtspecs/TR/2006/{\1}20061121/Overview.html 18:56:43 Yes 18:57:03 They're all there now, in fact, in various stages of pubrules cleanliness 18:57:06 OK. Updating draft transition request which was pointing at xsl-query-specs 18:57:45 sorry to be so slow 18:58:13 no worries. not like I'm not busy :-) 18:59:32 Are there .htaccess files in these directories to make the directory name select Overview.html ? 19:00:11 a: yes. 19:00:16 at least for data model 19:16:41 Norm, they're mostly there to get the encodings right 19:16:49 I think Overview.html is the site-wide default 19:17:09 Norm, are all Status sections currently identical? 19:17:26 or should I proofread. Each. One. In. Di. Vidually. 19:17:38 I can't swear to it, the editor's were supposed to copy what Jim sent 19:17:41 Each. One. In. Di. Vidually, I fear. 19:18:34 Personally, my concern for the status sections begins and ends wiht whether or not pubrules complains. I never read them. 19:18:50 Paul Cotton used to. Jim and Andrew...sometimes do. 19:19:26 And about the hail and locusts: Hey, Pal! Mine says what Jim said to say. What else do you want? :-) 19:20:33 OK, I'll call off the order for your distict. 19:21:04 assuming, of course, that it went Democratic. 19:21:32 of course, I should be careful - dunno what my neighbors did on the close races here. 19:22:16 or race: the only real contest in my precinct was for commissioner of public lands. unfortunately, the oil/gas industry guy won. 19:24:35 Zakim has left #xproc 19:24:54 Democratic across the board, I think, but I haven't checked 19:25:08 We got a democratic gov'n again though 19:33:04 Norm, question about XSLT. 19:33:11 Sure 19:33:15 The copy at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/11/qtspecs/TR/2006/PR-xslt20-20061121/Overview.html 19:33:32 Yes? 19:33:36 has a status section different from what I have in the draft transition request, 19:33:48 which I copied from email from Mike Kay (I think). 19:34:04 Rain down hail and locusts on the UK, I guess. I haven't touched that since Mike delivered it. 19:34:13 What do you know about the state of that doc? 19:34:17 when did he deliver this? 19:34:40 Uhm. 19:34:56 seems to be 7 Nov, at least in this dir 19:35:10 but that was probably you generating it ... 19:36:04 Mike last checked it in on 31 Oct 19:36:17 I assume he did what he was supposed to. 19:36:19 Arrgh. 19:36:24 Welcome to my world. 19:36:26 hail, locusts 19:36:28 excessive fog 19:36:40 no wait, that last is just normal UK november ... 19:36:49 lol 19:37:22 you don't touch it, but there's a crank you can turn to regenerate? 19:37:35 i.e. shall I edit the XML 19:37:49 or do we have to go through MK? 19:38:58 Oh, and to MSM too :-) 19:38:58 Edit the XML 19:38:58 If you've got ant, you should be able to build it yourself with "ant all" 19:39:14 Norm, you own the status sections, edit at will, that's my feeling 19:39:31 OK. 19:45:06 OK, it's clear from my mail logs that MK has been revising the status section since sending a draft to the WG on 13 Oct. 19:45:13 So at least I know which one to work from. 19:57:18 Good 19:57:18 Sorry, was distracted. 20:02:22 But the transition request can/will say "subject to pub-rules-related changes", so I won't change it yet 20:02:54 It will collide, please change it back. 20:03:03 That's got to be verbatim. 21:46:31 Norm has joined #xproc 22:17:37 Norm, I'm puzzled. 22:18:41 I was expecting that you would have some external file with a load of entity declarations for things like the close-of-comments date, so you coudl change it in one place and propagate the change everywhere. 22:19:42 Is it unworkable when there are so many different editors with varying skill sets? 22:19:57 or do you have religious scruples about general entities? 22:20:12 [ignore me, empty badinage] 22:24:49 norm, i'm worried. 22:25:34 XPathXQuery.xml in UTF8, I think, with ^M at ends of lines. 22:25:44 I'm not sure whether my emacs is going to cope well. 22:30:30 Be forewarned. 23:12:39 Norm, now checking in all sources ...