14:55:34 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #xproc
14:55:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-xproc-irc
14:55:39 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #xproc
14:55:42 <Norm> zakim, this will be xproc
14:55:42 <Zakim> ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
14:56:03 <Norm> Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
14:56:03 <Norm> Date: 28 June 2007
14:56:03 <Norm> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/06/28-agenda.html
14:56:03 <Norm> Meeting number: 73, T-minus 18 weeks
14:56:03 <Norm> Chair: Norm
14:56:04 <Norm> Scribe: Norm
14:56:06 <Norm> ScribeNick: Norm
14:57:18 <PGrosso> PGrosso has joined #xproc
14:59:31 <avernet> avernet has joined #xproc
14:59:52 <Zakim> XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
15:00:00 <Zakim> +Norm
15:00:33 <ht> zakim, please call ht-781
15:00:33 <Zakim> ok, ht; the call is being made
15:00:35 <Zakim> +Ht
15:00:46 <Zakim> +Alessandro_Vernet
15:01:06 <richard> richard has joined #xproc
15:01:22 <Zakim> +??P9
15:01:24 <Zakim> +[ArborText]
15:01:29 <ruilopes> zakim ?? is me
15:01:36 <ruilopes> zakim, ?? is me
15:01:36 <Zakim> +ruilopes; got it
15:01:38 <Zakim> +??P15
15:01:40 <richard> zakim, ? is me
15:01:40 <Zakim> +richard; got it
15:02:07 <Norm> zakim, who's on the phone?
15:02:07 <Zakim> On the phone I see Norm, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, ruilopes, PGrosso, richard
15:02:44 <Andrew> Andrew has joined #xproc
15:03:21 <Zakim> +??P21
15:03:31 <Andrew> zakim, ? is Andrew
15:03:31 <Zakim> +Andrew; got it
15:04:08 <Norm> zakim, who's on the phone?
15:04:08 <Zakim> On the phone I see Norm, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, ruilopes, PGrosso, richard, Andrew
15:04:22 <Norm> Present: Norm, Henry, Alessandro, Rui, Paul, Richard, Andrew
15:04:53 <Norm> Topic: Accept this agenda?
15:04:54 <Norm> -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/06/28-agenda
15:05:09 <alexmilowski> alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:05:18 <Zakim> +Alex_Milowski
15:05:32 <Norm> Norm suggests discussing the defaulting story after review of the editor's draft
15:05:44 <Norm> Accepted.
15:05:53 <Norm> Present: Norm, Henry, Alessandro, Rui, Paul, Richard, Andrew, Alex
15:05:59 <Norm> Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
15:05:59 <Norm> -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/06/21-minutes
15:06:05 <Norm> Accepted.
15:06:09 <Norm> Topic: Next meeting: telcon 5 July 2007
15:06:20 <Norm> Richard give regrets for the next three weeks
15:06:35 <Norm> Topic: Review of 25 June 2007 Editor's Draft
15:06:35 <Norm> -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html
15:07:44 <Norm> Henry: I had one comment, but it probably comes up on the defaulting thread.
15:08:22 <Norm> Henry: In section 2, it says "each step declares its input and output ports"
15:08:34 <Norm> ...that's not true, they have bindings, but not declarations.
15:08:57 <Norm> ...editorially, I think it might be good to distinguish between steps and types of steps somewhere around here.
15:11:15 <Norm> Norm: It sounds like it might be a little premature to publish this draft.
15:11:36 <Norm> Henry: Assuming that whatever we decide about defaulting is judged by the editor to be straightforward, I'd be prepared to do a New Orleans vote for next week.
15:11:58 <Norm> Norm: Yeah, maybe that's the way to go.
15:12:38 <Norm> Norm: So can we assume that we'll publish this draft, plus any defaulting story, next Friday if there are no objections.
15:12:41 <Norm> No objections.
15:14:17 <Norm> Paul: When's last call?
15:14:25 <Norm> Some discussion of scheduling; Henry, Richard out for July
15:14:35 <Norm> Henry: I'm happy to go to last call before I return.
15:14:58 <Norm> Norm: Let's aim to have the last call go/no go vote on 26 July
15:16:03 <Norm> Henry: I suggest a New Orlean's vote on the 26th too
15:19:22 <Norm> More discussion
15:19:37 <Norm> Last call before Extreme, CR in August, PR in September, if we have enough impls.
15:20:20 <Norm> Topic: Defaulting
15:20:20 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Jun/0171.html
15:20:54 <Norm> Richard reviews the proposal
15:21:47 <Norm> Richard: Only default inputs and outputs get connected up automatically.
15:22:08 <Norm> Richard: A disadvantage of defaulting in general is that it allows you to make mistakes.
15:23:14 <Norm> Norm: How do folks feel about that?
15:23:20 <Norm> Accepted.
15:24:45 <ht> q+ to request an independent decision about what, if it's allowed, is meant by "<p:input port="..."/>
15:25:28 <Norm> Norm: A pipeline with no declared inputs gets a default one if the first step needs one.
15:25:53 <Norm> Richard: Right. If you want a pipeline with no inputs, make sure the first step doesn't have an unbound default input.
15:26:15 <Norm> Richard: We do a similar thing for outputs.
15:26:28 <Norm> Richard: Unconnected default outputs on the last step becomes the pipeline output.
15:26:35 <Norm> s/outputs on/output on/
15:26:56 <Norm> Richard: We also propose that other default outputs not be left unconnected.
15:27:26 <Norm> Richard: The store component, for example, would be declared not to have a default output.
15:27:49 <Norm> ...So you'd have to connect that up exlicitly.
15:28:30 <Norm> Henry: Inputs and outputs and defaulting are now completely symmetrical.
15:28:41 <Norm> Henry: A single input/output is the default, otherwise you have to specify.
15:29:55 <Norm> Richard: I think this natural. The thing you think of as flowing through the pipeline will usually flow throw the default inputs and outputs.
15:30:18 <Norm> ack ht
15:30:18 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to request an independent decision about what, if it's allowed, is meant by "<p:input port="..."/>
15:30:45 <Norm> Norm: Does anyone object to the proposal so far?
15:31:06 <Norm> Accepted.
15:31:48 <Norm> Henry: The first separable question is, should we continue to allow inputs with no bindings, and what should it mean?
15:32:07 <Norm> ...I think there are two choices: given that if you want an empty sequence, you write <p:empty>.
15:32:20 <Norm> ...First is, it's an error. You must give an input content.
15:32:27 <Norm> ...Alternatively, it means give me the default readable port.
15:32:35 <Norm> Henry: I marginally prefer the latter.
15:33:04 <Norm> Richard: It let's you bind to the preceding step without using its name.
15:33:14 <Norm> Henry: Ok.
15:34:18 <Norm> Norm: I'm ok with this and I think it should bind to the default readable port.
15:35:01 <Norm> Norm: Anyone object to connecting a named, but unbound, input port to the default readable port.?
15:35:10 <Norm> s/port.?/port?/
15:35:13 <Norm> Accepted.
15:35:17 <ht> q+ to suggest treating all containers alike wrt missing outputs
15:35:31 <Norm> q+ To reintroduce p:sink
15:35:32 <Norm> ack ht
15:35:32 <Zakim> ht, you wanted to suggest treating all containers alike wrt missing outputs
15:36:14 <ht> <p:pipeline><p:xinclude/></p:pipeline>
15:36:38 <Norm> Henry: It seems like what we've said about pipelines ought to also work for other compound steps.
15:36:56 <ht> <p:choose><p:when test="..."><p:xinclude/></p:when><p:otherwise><p:identity/></p:pipeline>
15:37:42 <Norm> Norm: I'm worried a little bit about the complexity of our story, but I do agree.
15:38:00 <Norm> Henry: So I propose that we allow compound steps to get a default output.
15:39:04 <Norm> Some discussion.
15:40:41 <Norm> Henry: The names and cardinalities should remain the same, this is only for the case where none of the branches declare any outputs.
15:41:01 <Norm> Norm: If any branch declares an output then they all have to declare them the same.
15:42:08 <Norm> Henry: The spec should say that they all have to be the same.
15:42:53 <Norm> Richard: What about the case where choose has multiple outputs because all of the branches have multiple outputs.
15:42:58 <Norm> Henry: They must all be the same.
15:43:20 <Norm> Norm: Any objections to this proposal?
15:43:25 <Norm> Accepted.
15:43:29 <Norm> ack Norm
15:43:29 <Zakim> Norm, you wanted to reintroduce p:sink
15:43:38 <Norm> Norm: Can we p:sink, please?
15:43:41 <Norm> Henry: Yes.
15:44:24 <Norm> Henry: Although it is the case that p:store could be used for this purpose if we invented a /dev/null URI, but it would be harder to optimize.
15:46:31 <Norm> Richard: We now have possibility of pipelines themselves with unnamed inputs and outputs. It will be a question for implementations how they connect these up?
15:47:38 <Norm> Norm: Anyone object to p:sink?
15:47:40 <Norm> Accepted.
15:48:24 <Norm> Topic: Proposal to add "group-by" option to p:wrap
15:48:24 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007May/0377.html
15:49:16 <Norm> Henry: I made a proposal, I stand by it.
15:49:43 <Norm> Henry: I know that Mohamed wants a subsidary XPath that identifies what you can ignore.
15:49:45 <PGrosso> PGrosso has joined #xproc
15:49:53 <Norm> ...I think that's the wrong end of the 80/20.
15:50:14 <Norm> Norm: We can add that later, if we're convinced.
15:50:45 <Norm> Norm: Any objections to Henry's proposal?
15:50:49 <Norm> Accepted.
15:50:57 <Norm> Topic: Wrapper name in p:wrap-sequence?
15:50:57 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Jun/0190.html
15:51:19 <Norm> Norm: We ought to make the wrapper a QName.
15:51:21 <Norm> Alex: Yes.
15:51:25 <Norm> Norm: Any objections?
15:51:26 <Norm> Accepted.
15:51:31 <Norm> Topic: Recursion?
15:51:31 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Jun/0198.html
15:56:02 <Norm> Norm outlines the state of play as he understands it.
15:56:36 <Norm> Norm: I think we should make it explicitly allowed.
15:56:44 <Norm> Norm: Any objections?
15:56:47 <Norm> Accepted.
15:57:09 <Norm> Topic: Any other business?
15:57:13 <Norm> None.
15:57:19 <Norm> Adjourned 
15:57:50 <Zakim> -richard
15:57:51 <Zakim> -Andrew
15:57:52 <Zakim> -Norm
15:57:54 <Zakim> -Alessandro_Vernet
15:57:55 <Zakim> -PGrosso
15:57:56 <Zakim> -ruilopes
15:57:57 <Zakim> -Alex_Milowski
15:58:02 <Norm> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
15:58:12 <Norm> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:58:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/06/28-xproc-minutes.html Norm
15:58:52 <ht> I think it's important to remember that "{in-scope namespaces} 'travels with' option bindings" is a cumulative story, so, e.g. <p:option name="foo" value="x:baz"/>  somewhere high, and <p:option name="bar" select="concat('y:goo',$foo)"/>, the environment will have to have ns-bindings for both 'x' and 'y' 'travelling with' the 'bar' option
15:58:58 <Zakim> -Ht
15:58:59 <Zakim> XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
15:59:01 <Zakim> Attendees were Norm, Ht, Alessandro_Vernet, PGrosso, ruilopes, richard, Andrew, Alex_Milowski
15:59:15 <ht> Norm -- please catch that last remark for the minutes -- sorry, typed too slowly
15:59:15 <PGrosso> PGrosso has left #xproc
15:59:25 <Norm> ht, yeah, I think you're right. It's going to be a little tricky :-)
15:59:51 <ht> I actually think it will be straightforward to _state_, just a little tricky to implement
15:59:57 <Norm> :-)
16:21:53 <ht> So I think the only change to the grammar that is required, to make p:output optional, is the content model of p:viewport
16:23:11 <ht> Norm?
16:45:56 <avernet> avernet has joined #xproc
17:02:51 <Norm> Yes, ht_gone_home ?
18:05:36 <Zakim> Zakim has left #xproc
18:07:37 <Norm> rrsagent, bye
18:07:37 <RRSAgent> I see no action items