14:57:12 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 14:57:12 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-irc 14:57:14 Zakim has joined #xproc 14:57:46 Norm has changed the topic to: XProc WG http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/04/19-agenda.html 14:58:01 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 14:58:06 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 14:58:06 Date: 19 Apr 2007 14:58:06 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/04/19-agenda.html 14:58:06 Meeting number: 64, T-minus 28 weeks 14:58:06 Chair: Norm 14:58:07 Scribe: Norm 14:58:09 ScribeNick: Norm 14:58:14 Regrets: Paul, Andrew, Henry 15:00:23 zakim, this is xproc 15:00:23 ok, Norm; that matches XML_PMWG()11:00AM 15:00:26 rrsagent, pointer? 15:00:26 See http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-irc#T15-00-26 15:00:32 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:00:32 On the phone I see Alex_Milows, Norm 15:01:13 +??P13 15:01:26 zakim, ??P13 is rlopes 15:01:27 +rlopes; got it 15:02:01 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html 15:02:01 +Alessandro_Vernet 15:03:39 richard has joined #xproc 15:04:02 Regrets: Paul, Andrew, Henry, Mohamed 15:04:15 MSM, are you planning to attend the XProc call today? 15:04:50 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:04:52 On the phone I see Alex_Milows, Norm, rlopes, Alessandro_Vernet 15:06:40 +??P3 15:06:42 zakim, ? is me 15:06:42 +richard; got it 15:06:54 Present: Norm, Alex, Rui, Alessandro, Richard 15:06:59 Topic: Accept this agenda? 15:06:59 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/04/19-agenda.html 15:07:05 Accepted. 15:07:10 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 15:07:10 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/03/12-minutes.html 15:07:14 Accepted. 15:07:18 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 26 Apr 2007 15:07:28 No regrets given 15:07:41 Topic: Handling non-XML serializations 15:08:25 Norm: I think this has two parts: final result from the pipeline, but we also have the question of what, for example, an XSLT component should do if its output is text. 15:09:15 Alex: I have a simple requirement to have a declaration in the pipeline document of how the author would like the results to be serialized. 15:09:31 ...I don't know where we should put that, in the syntax, but that's what I need. 15:09:52 ...This is like the XSLT transform situation which has an xsl:output declaration. 15:10:13 ...I want to replace an XSLT transformation with a pipeline and I want to make sure that the output is serialized the same way. 15:10:34 Norm: So you don't want to be able to track what the XSLT said. 15:10:53 avernet has joined #xproc 15:10:56 Alex: I think we have a story there. To be consistent, the shortest answer is that we say that XML documents come out on the output port. 15:11:52 Norm: the outputs of an XSLT processor aren't serizlied. 15:12:03 Richard: Not in your implementation. I think we should be agnostic about this. 15:12:08 ...The output you get is the output you get. 15:12:24 Alex: But implementations can do the right thing if they know what the output should be. 15:12:53 Alex: I'd like to be able to allow an author to express the serialization of a pipeline result. 15:13:04 ...We could declare that out-of-scope and be done. 15:13:30 Richard: I don't mind the pipeine saying somewhere that it's output is HTML, but I hope you're not suggesting that the pipeline should be required to produce HTML if the last step doesn't produce HTML. 15:13:40 Alex: No, it's just a declaration of intent. 15:14:24 Richard: If I write a pipeline and say the output is HTML and the last thing is an XSLT step,then you have to say it's HTML there too. 15:14:28 Alex: We have to clarify that. 15:14:53 Norm: I think they're independent. 15:15:44 Richard: I had thought that if the last step happened to not produce XML output then as a special case that's ok. 15:16:23 Norm: That's not what I thought. 15:16:56 Richard: The pipeline has to know every kind of output. 15:17:01 Alex: No it doesn't, it's either XML or it isn't. 15:17:02 -rlopes 15:17:15 Richard: Suppose I write an addon component that produces foo output. 15:17:31 Norm: It crashes and burns. 15:17:42 +??P5 15:17:45 Alex: The constraint on output ports says you have to produce (a sequence of) XML documents. 15:17:49 Zakim, ? is me 15:17:49 +rlopes; got it 15:18:09 Richard: So who does produce XSLT? 15:18:12 -rlopes 15:18:20 Alex: The way it works in JAXP depends on how you invoke the transform. 15:18:59 s/XSLT/HTML/ 15:19:24 +[IPcaller] 15:19:32 Zakim: [ is me 15:19:38 Zakim, [ is me 15:19:38 +rlopes; got it 15:20:23 Norm: I thought you'd either serialize with a component or the serialization would be an implementation-dependent feature. 15:20:51 Alex: What about a separate document that specifies the pairings. 15:21:56 Richard: I expect people to run things from the command line, I'd expect to have command line arguments that specified those things. 15:22:10 ...It sounds like what Alex is asking for is the equivalent of standardizing the command line arguments. 15:22:16 ...I think that's something we should leave to the implementations. 15:23:08 Norm: XSLT serializes, we don't. 15:23:17 Alex: I think the XSLT spec says, "if you serialize..." 15:23:45 Richard: You're drawing the parallel with XSLT so the place to put the hint would be in the pipeline document. 15:23:55 Alex: I'd prefer that it be in the pipeline document. 15:24:22 Richard: This is something the pipeline author chooses. 15:24:30 Alex: Right 15:26:31 Norm: So we're thinking of putting this the whole xsl:output thing in XProc 15:27:03 Norm: And what about character maps, how far are we going to go? 15:27:38 Alex: I think we'd want to support all the serialization features of XSLT 2.0/XQuery 1.0 serialization. 15:27:51 Richard: I don't want to implement all of that stuff. 15:28:14 Alex: But it's a slippery slope. Once you start writing stuff to disk you wind up here. 15:30:17 Richard: Not if we don't support XSLT 2.0 serialization 15:30:29 ...XSLT 1.0 was quite useful without having any of that stuff in it. 15:32:10 Norm: Maybe p:store should be optional. 15:32:31 Alessandro: Can we have two store components, one the XSLT 1.0 way, one the XSLT 2.0 way. 15:32:49 Alex: I think we should treat serialization as a feature. 15:33:27 Richard: I think that if we allow all these complicated serializations then we don't want to reinvent the wheel. But I also think this should be no-more required than XSLT 2.0. 15:33:57 Norm: Maybe we need p:store to store XML and an optional p:serialize to do all sorts of XSLT 2.0-style goo. 15:34:20 Richard: It can be one component with a parameter. 15:34:34 ...that you're only required to support certain values of. 15:34:52 Alex: I like the idea of having a serialization feature like XSLT 2. 15:35:01 Norm: I think that's a V2 feature. 15:35:37 Alex: We have use cases that require producing HTML. 15:36:27 Norm: Can we get away with a serialization feature like XSLT *1.0* 15:36:53 Alex: The feature I added to p:store was just to say "method". 15:37:50 Norm: I wonder if Alex you'd be willing to write this up as a more concrete proposal and send it out in mail. 15:37:54 Alex: I can do that. 15:38:04 ACTION: Alex to construct a proposal for adding a serialization feature to XProc. 15:38:34 Topic: Obstacles to Last Call? 15:39:07 Editorial notes from the spec: 15:39:24 When/how is XML well-formedness checked? 15:39:49 Errors in try/catch 15:40:01 Rui: We have to define the error vocabulary 15:40:28 We have to do a better job of define the vocabularies for the other components. 15:41:02 Can anyone think of anything else? 15:41:42 Alex: We need to convince ourselves that we have met all our use cases. 15:42:20 Norm: So let's get those things taken care of! 15:42:39 ACTION: Norm to draft something for the error vocabulary. 15:42:59 Topic: Review of the step library 15:43:03 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html 15:43:27 http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#c.subsequence 15:43:29 MoZ has joined #xproc 15:43:38 Alex: The first is subsequence. 15:44:41 Alex: I added the $p:position variable. 15:44:54 Norm: Do we want this to be an XPath extension function? 15:45:26 Alex: I think if you look at the specs for XPath, it allows this conceptually. 15:45:56 ...An extension function is harder to implement. 15:46:50 Norm: Ok, we can try the variable. 15:47:47 Alex: Then there's include-last, exclude-last 15:47:54 Norm: Why not include-last=yes/no 15:48:30 Alex: The semantics are more complicated. 15:49:38 Some discussion of the semantics 15:49:52 Norm: So include-last would throw away everything except the last? 15:50:06 Alex: Err, this is underspecified, isn't it? 15:51:37 Norm: I like Mohamed's suggestion, head to return the first 'n'; tail, to return the last 'n', and a subsequence. 15:51:49 s/subsequence/subsequence that tests./ 15:53:50 Agreed. 15:57:28 Alex summarizes the changes: p:store, p:validate-relax-ng, p:xquery 15:57:38 Alex: I want to clean up the whole definition of the spec definition elements. 15:57:49 Norm: Yes, I'll work on that. It's a stylesheet issue. 15:59:21 Topic: Any other business? 15:59:24 None. 15:59:30 Adjourned. 15:59:32 -Alex_Milows 15:59:33 -Norm 15:59:35 -rlopes 15:59:36 -Alessandro_Vernet 15:59:37 -richard 15:59:38 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 15:59:39 Attendees were Alex_Milows, Norm, rlopes, Alessandro_Vernet, richard, [IPcaller] 16:00:22 PGrosso has left #xproc 16:09:51 avernet has left #xproc 16:17:02 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 16:17:09 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 16:17:13 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:17:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-minutes.html Norm 17:23:21 Zakim has left #xproc 20:19:39 rrsagent, bye 20:19:39 I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-actions.rdf : 20:19:39 ACTION: Alex to construct a proposal for adding a serialization feature to XProc. [1] 20:19:39 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-irc#T15-38-04 20:19:39 ACTION: Norm to draft something for the error vocabulary. [2] 20:19:39 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/19-xproc-irc#T15-42-39