15:53:54 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 15:53:54 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/03/01-xproc-irc 15:54:33 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 15:54:33 Date: 1 Mar 2007 15:54:33 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/03/01-agenda.html 15:54:33 Meeting number: 57, T-minus 35 weeks 15:54:33 Chair: Norm 15:54:34 Scribe: Norm 15:54:36 ScribeNick: Norm 15:55:31 Hi Norm, you never use the Agenda function of RRSAgent ? 15:55:37 PGrosso has joined #xproc 15:55:51 I've tried occasionally, but found it inconvenient 15:56:20 Alessandro has joined #xproc 15:58:58 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 15:59:56 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started 16:00:03 +Norm 16:00:03 +Alex_Milowski 16:00:41 +[ArborText] 16:00:47 +Alessandro_Vernet 16:00:55 rlopes has joined #xproc 16:01:13 zakim, who's on the phone? 16:01:13 On the phone I see Alex_Milowski, Norm, PGrosso, Alessandro_Vernet 16:01:32 zakim, please call MSM-Office 16:01:32 ok, MSM; the call is being made 16:01:33 +MSM 16:01:46 +[IPcaller] 16:01:49 zakim, please mute me 16:01:49 +Murray_Maloney 16:01:50 MSM should now be muted 16:02:00 Zakim, [ is me 16:02:00 +rlopes; got it 16:02:02 AndrewF has joined #xproc 16:02:09 zakim, who's on the phone? 16:02:09 On the phone I see Alex_Milowski, Norm, PGrosso, Alessandro_Vernet, MSM (muted), rlopes, Murray_Maloney 16:02:42 +MoZ 16:02:50 +??P52 16:02:53 zakim, ? is AndrewF 16:02:53 +AndrewF; got it 16:04:46 zakim, please call ht-781 16:04:47 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:04:49 +Ht 16:05:10 Present: Norm, Alex, Paul, Alessandro, Michael, Rui, Murray, Mohamed, Andrew, Henry 16:05:10 Regrets: Richard 16:05:37 Topic: Accept this agenda? 16:05:37 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/03/01-agenda.html 16:05:42 Accepted. 16:05:47 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 16:05:47 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/02/22-minutes.html 16:05:55 Accepted. 16:06:01 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 8 Mar 2007 16:06:29 Mohamed gives regrets 16:06:43 Topic: New draft 16:06:56 Norm: I published a new draft yesterday. 16:07:07 Norm summarizes. 16:07:24 If I cut out, my DSL connection is flakey today and all I have is VOIP... 16:08:08 Norm: There's no reasonable diff. 16:08:17 -MSM 16:10:50 zakim, please call MSM-Office 16:10:50 ok, MSM; the call is being made 16:10:51 +MSM 16:14:39 q+ 16:15:33 Norm outlines the current dichotomy between QName and NCName and p:pipeline and everwhere else. 16:15:47 Henry: We never need to refer to p:pipelines yes? 16:16:04 Norm: No, the p:pipe elements have to point to them. 16:16:17 Henry: That's inside a pipeline, so we'd like that to be an NCName. 16:16:42 Norm: We also need to be able to refer to pipelines. 16:16:58 Henry: My vague memory was that we won't have a run-pipeline component in V1. 16:18:14 Norm: My understanding was that we wouldn't provide a mechanism for running a dynamically constructed pipeline but that we would provide a mechanism for running static pipelines from libraries 16:18:37 Alex: I don't see why we made the names NCNames. It should be just like the names of templates in XSLT. 16:19:41 Henry: The major confusion factor that I've observed in that context is that you have to worry about names getting captured by the default namespace declarations. 16:21:11 Alex: It should be up to the user. If you don't want to use QNames, you don't have to. 16:22:11 Norm: Agenda item for next week: how to call static pipelines in an imported library. 16:22:41 Henry: If you've defined a named pipe, then you should be able to invoke it by writing its name as a start tag in a subpipeline. 16:24:33 Topic: Parameters 16:25:07 zakim, please mute me 16:25:07 MSM should now be muted 16:25:58 Norm: The problem as I see it is what, if anything, we do about the case of parameter for step invokation vs parameters for the invoked component. 16:28:38 Henry: Saxon 8, for example, distinguishes between options and parameters. 16:29:23 Norm: Jeni brings in lists of strings which I'd like to overlook for the moment. 16:29:26 Alex: What we have now is good enough. 16:31:22 Alex: Our current parameter story is simple and I don't think we need anything else. We can say which things are significant to the configuration of the step. 16:32:20 Norm: Works for me. 16:33:47 Norm: Does anyone think there's anything wrong with Alex's approach? 16:33:57 Henry: I haven't read the thread, but it sounds right. 16:34:29 q+ 16:34:32 ack Alessandro 16:35:01 Alessandro: I think I agree. But I still think that Jeni's answer has some merit. In particular, I like the third proposal. 16:35:42 Norm: What problem is she solving? 16:36:15 Alessandro: Well, it addresses the case of different classes of parameters. XSLT has two classes, but other components might have more classes. 16:36:58 q+ 16:37:00 q+ 16:38:43 it is the open content model for documentation problem... 16:38:50 That's the problem. 16:39:04 Norm: I'm worried about determining the difference between subpipelines and parameters. 16:39:12 Henry: We've said that user-defined steps are atomic. 16:39:23 e.g. the component's element can have ignorable children ... 16:39:45 zakim, mute ht 16:39:45 Ht should now be muted 16:40:05 alexmilowski, p:documentation 16:40:16 q? 16:40:18 ack Alessandro 16:40:22 ack alexmilowski 16:40:37 Alex: The problem is our steps have an open content model in order to allow documentation. 16:41:32 Alex: For these crazy components that have all these problems with weird lists and values, this is XML, you can pass those as an *input* 16:42:25 ack ht 16:42:25 ack ht 16:42:46 Henry: That's a helpful observation. It almost leads me back to the minimalist position to which I'd originally been inclined. 16:43:33 ...First I was going to say that my understanding of Jeni's use case is that it relies on sub-symbol spaces. But as Alex observed earlier, namespaces are the XML solution to this problme. 16:43:43 s/problme/problem/ 16:44:08 Oh... no... we need QNames on parameters for simple setting of things like XSLT parameters... 16:44:15 q+ 16:44:23 Henry: I didn't notice that parameters were named with QNames. I think we should rely on here documents. 16:45:20 Murray: There are options that I type on the command line, like -o, and then there's information that we pass into the application. It's going to use that information to do its job. A stylesheet is one example 16:45:40 ...Although we've talked about competing name tokens, it seems to me that they're competing in different environments. 16:45:59 ...It seems as though the conflict is happening in two different environments. 16:46:33 Whew! saxon uses {uri}localname=value to bind parameters in namespaces to values on the command line 16:47:46 MoZ just said he likes p:option and p:parameter, and I think that's worth thinking about 16:47:48 Norm: We don't have a mechanism for dynamically generating a document. 16:48:36 16:48:59 PGrosso has joined #xproc 16:49:12 Henry: I think the options of the builtin component should be in the pipeline namespace or in the appropriate namespace for the component. 16:50:18 Yeah, I guess I agree -- we're calling it p:xslt, not xsl:doit. . . 16:52:37 Norm: I think it would be fair to just not pass the parameters in the p: namespace through 16:52:42 Henry: I'm not sure about thta. 16:53:06 Norm: Well, it's not clear that there's a right answer. 16:53:34 q+ 16:53:39 ack Alessandro 16:53:55 Alessandro: We could use prefixes just like I outlined in email. 16:54:35 Henry: I think namespaces are the prefixing mechanism to use in XML. 16:54:56 ...I come back to the other proposal that we have p:option and p:parameter. 16:55:41 -MoZ 16:55:48 Norm: Can mortals be expect to tell the difference? 16:56:07 Henry: But few components have options so it doesn't seem to be a problem. 16:56:20 Murray: We just have to explain it in the spec. 16:56:32 +MoZ 16:56:34 query does too... 16:56:38 xquery that is... 16:56:39 Henry: Only XSLT, of all the components we've discussed so far, makes this distinction. 16:56:43 -MoZ 16:57:22 +MoZ 16:57:29 ack moz 16:58:02 Mohamed: Jeni's remark was about configuration parameter vs. parameter that was difficult to distinguish, but maybe option and parameter will be more obvious. 16:58:20 ...I think it would be interesting to go further. 16:59:14 Norm: It seems like we're coming to consensus that we should use p:option and p:parameter. 16:59:53 ACTION: Norm will type up a proposal for p:option and p:parameter. 17:00:00 Topic: Any other business 17:00:03 None. 17:00:06 Adjourned. 17:00:08 -PGrosso 17:00:09 -Murray_Maloney 17:00:12 -AndrewF 17:00:13 -Alessandro_Vernet 17:00:14 -Norm 17:00:15 -Alex_Milowski 17:00:16 -rlopes 17:00:18 -MoZ 17:00:18 PGrosso has left #xproc 17:00:19 -Ht 17:00:22 -MSM 17:00:23 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 17:00:24 Attendees were Norm, Alex_Milowski, PGrosso, Alessandro_Vernet, MSM, [IPcaller], Murray_Maloney, rlopes, MoZ, AndrewF, Ht 17:00:25 alexmilowski has left #xproc 17:16:12 rrsagent, make logs world-visible 17:16:17 rrsagent, draft minutes 17:16:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/03/01-xproc-minutes.html Norm 18:13:20 Norm, still there ? 18:13:26 Yes 18:14:00 do you have access to this email : http://www.w3.org/mid/4F614E6C-B0F5-4976-9AF2-5C925AC74556@nokia.com 18:14:39 Yes 18:14:49 great, 18:14:56 I wanted you to read it :) 18:15:15 I appreciate the need, but I'm sorry to see we'll have yet another transformation language 18:15:42 that's the tricky point 18:16:23 I'll try to avoid this by looking at sub/superset of XPath/XSLT/Xquery for that stuff 18:16:32 If the XG becomes a WG, I hope the charter is "thou shalt subset XPath" 18:16:58 As soon as it's a superset, there's a whole, huge coordination, user education, tools migration problem 18:17:02 I'm sure it will be a subset of XPath 18:17:14 the matter is more for XSLT because we need a superset actually 18:18:00 Well, I'd rather see a strict subset there, too 18:18:16 hum... 18:18:35 If you could elaborate, i would be very happy 18:19:12 I just think a superset is going to be a coordination, user education nightmare 18:19:42 you're undoubtfully right 18:20:10 but the very functional way of XSLT is a limitation for streaming 18:20:38 there will be a need to stack information 18:21:07 Maybe I don't understand the requirements well enough. I'll look forward to reading the output of the XG :) 18:21:45 Great ! 18:22:09 actually do you use StAX for big transformation ? 18:23:19 Norm, I use XSLT :-) 18:23:37 My XProc impl uses the StAX events APIs, but it builds DOMs for XSLT 18:27:54 ok 18:28:20 but XSLT has severe drawback for unlimited length files, and **big** files 18:29:04 ...you would probably tell me that it could be an xquery use case 18:30:51 heh 18:31:02 Norm, I like the feature, I just wish it was a little less aggressive 18:31:07 AURRGHH! 18:31:10 See what I mean? 18:35:42 lol 19:21:08 Zakim has left #xproc 19:58:24 Norm has joined #xproc 21:29:04 Norm has joined #xproc 22:05:55 MSM has joined #xproc 22:08:54 Norm has joined #xproc