IRC log of xproc on 2007-09-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:41:55 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
14:41:55 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/09/13-xproc-irc
14:42:05 [ht]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
14:42:11 [ht]
Chair: Henry S. Thompson
14:42:16 [ht]
Scribe: Henry S. Thompson
14:42:21 [ht]
ScribeNick: ht
14:43:01 [ht]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/13-agenda.html
14:46:02 [MSM]
MSM has joined #xproc
14:48:37 [ht]
Morning Michael
14:50:13 [avernet]
avernet has joined #xproc
14:53:42 [MSM]
good morning / afternoon, henry
14:54:01 [MSM]
we are running late this morning; I will be on the call, but may be late
14:54:28 [ht]
OK -- it will be a short call, we may get to the Last Call decision before you arrive
14:55:23 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has joined #xproc
14:56:16 [ruilopes]
ruilopes has joined #xproc
14:57:14 [ht]
Michael, do I have your proxy until you join?
14:59:37 [ht]
Topic: Admin.Rollcall
15:00:39 [ht]
zakim, this is xproc
15:00:39 [Zakim]
ht, I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be xproc".
15:00:47 [ht]
zakim, this will be xproc
15:00:47 [Zakim]
ok, ht; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now
15:00:52 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:00:52 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:01:27 [ht]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:01:27 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has not yet started, ht
15:01:28 [Zakim]
On IRC I see ruilopes, PGrosso, avernet, MSM, RRSAgent, Zakim, MoZ, ht
15:02:04 [ht]
zakim, this is xproc
15:02:04 [Zakim]
ok, ht; that matches XML_PMWG()11:00AM
15:02:12 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
15:02:26 [Zakim]
+??P34
15:02:30 [avernet]
zakim, ? is avernet
15:02:32 [Zakim]
+avernet; got it
15:02:57 [Zakim]
+[IPcaller]
15:02:59 [Zakim]
+??P2
15:03:00 [richard]
zakim, ? is me
15:03:12 [MoZ]
Zakim, what is the code ?
15:03:18 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
15:03:18 [ruilopes]
Zakim, [IP is me
15:03:28 [Zakim]
the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MoZ
15:03:42 [Zakim]
+ruilopes; got it
15:04:00 [Andrew]
Andrew has joined #xproc
15:04:39 [Zakim]
+??P9
15:04:42 [ht]
HT: Norm is running late, HST is chair _pro tem_
15:04:44 [Andrew]
zakim, ? is Andrew
15:04:44 [Zakim]
+Andrew; got it
15:04:58 [ht]
zakim, who is on the call?
15:04:59 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PGrosso, Ht, Alex_Milows, avernet, ruilopes, richard, Andrew
15:05:28 [ht]
HT: Apologies from MSM and Norm who will join later
15:05:42 [ht]
Topic: Admin.agenda
15:06:27 [ht]
HT: Accepted as published
15:06:40 [ht]
Topic: Admin.next meeting
15:07:15 [Zakim]
+MoZ
15:07:28 [ht]
HT: We will meet next in two weeks, provided we get to Last Call this week
15:07:43 [ht]
Topic: Admin.minutes
15:07:58 [ht]
HT: Comments on these minutes: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/06-minutes.html
15:08:17 [ht]
HT: Approved as they stand
15:08:29 [ht]
Topic: Comments on the draft of 11 September
15:08:36 [ht]
http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html
15:09:19 [ht]
AM: The appendix isn't there yet
15:10:09 [ht]
HT: True, but as it's non-normative, so it can be added later
15:10:22 [ht]
AM: I have a draft for part of it, we could add it right away
15:10:52 [ht]
PG: I'd rather not do that, let's get the LC draft out, and add that in a subsequent draft when it's complete. There's a time issue here, with the Tech Plenary coming up
15:11:11 [ht]
... No objection to the idea of the appendix at all
15:11:43 [ht]
AM: Consensus was that we would have this appendix
15:12:18 [ht]
HT: Straw poll on 3 options:
15:12:31 [ht]
... 1) Publish ASAP w/o any appendix
15:12:55 [ht]
... 2) Publish same time with whatever Alex can supply by the time Norm needs it
15:13:12 [ht]
... 3) Hold publication for agreed complete appendix
15:13:20 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:14:02 [ht]
PG: We could publish as is for last call, and publish a separate WG note asap
15:14:42 [ht]
AM: We can get the text I've written already in in just a few minutes
15:14:50 [ht]
AV: Sounds like option 2 is what you want
15:16:15 [MSM]
zakim, please call MSM-Office
15:16:15 [Zakim]
ok, MSM; the call is being made
15:16:17 [Zakim]
+MSM
15:16:22 [ht]
PG: (2) ; HT: (2); AM: (2) ; AV (2) ; RL (2) ; RT (2) ; AG (2) ; MZ (2)
15:16:31 [alexmilowski]
Here's the text: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Sep/0053.html
15:16:32 [ht]
HT: Unanimous straw poll result
15:16:46 [alexmilowski]
Minus the "general" bit
15:17:28 [ht]
Any objection to the editors being authorized to publish the 11 September draft with the addition of a non-normative appendix giving guidance on Namespace fixup to the extent possible w/o delaying publication?
15:18:08 [ht]
RESOLVED: to publish the 11 September draft as a public Last Call WD with the addition of a non-normative appendix giving guidance on Namespace fixup to the extent possible w/o delaying publication?
15:18:59 [ht]
Topic: Split the spec?
15:19:38 [MSM]
q+ to ask about terminology and conformance
15:19:42 [ht]
HT: Discussion -- could do it later, not a substantive question
15:20:09 [ht]
AM: Prefer to keep it as one document, easier right now, and easier for consumers down the road
15:20:21 [ht]
ack MSM
15:20:21 [Zakim]
MSM, you wanted to ask about terminology and conformance
15:21:11 [ht]
MSM: People say it's not substantive, but it does affect something crucial, namely the ability to say that you conform to the spec.
15:21:50 [ht]
... If we split the spec., and version the parts separately, will people end up having to say "conforms to 1.n of the spec and 1.m of the library?"
15:22:49 [ht]
... Also, splitting would make the framework very abstract, or we need to allow ourselves to refer to examples in the library 1.0
15:23:21 [ht]
... Does the library of steps make sense outside the context of the XProc framework?
15:23:38 [ht]
HT: Anybody prepared to argue in favour?
15:24:16 [ht]
RESOLVED: We will not split the spec. before going to Last Call
15:25:16 [ht]
Topic: Test cases
15:25:36 [ht]
HT: Some discussio about where they are going to come from by email
15:25:58 [ht]
... Where is the energy going to come from for managing test collection?
15:26:19 [ht]
RT: Implementors will produce tests
15:26:34 [ht]
... Lets wait and see what they look like, and if we can put them into a framework
15:26:59 [ht]
MSM: Would a task force help?
15:27:31 [ht]
HT: Indeed, has worked some times
15:27:40 [MSM]
zaki, who is here?
15:27:44 [MSM]
zakim, who is here?
15:27:44 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PGrosso, Ht, Alex_Milows, avernet, ruilopes, richard, Andrew, MoZ, MSM
15:27:47 [Zakim]
On IRC I see alexmilowski, Andrew, richard, ruilopes, PGrosso, avernet, MSM, RRSAgent, Zakim, MoZ, ht
15:28:45 [ht]
RT: Happy to work on test cases, but not until I need tests for my own implementation and am developing them
15:29:33 [ht]
MSM: Last Call ends?
15:29:43 [ht]
HT: 24 October
15:30:02 [ht]
MSM: Only 5 weeks to know what to say our test input to the CR decision will be
15:30:28 [ht]
... That's pretty soon, if we don't have any serious pushback on the spec. itself
15:30:53 [ht]
HT: Two ways we could go -- push hard on tests right away, or lengthen the last call period
15:31:13 [ht]
MSM: Or just expect we will have some gap between the end of LC and the beginning of CR
15:31:38 [ht]
AM: This period is a really good time to focus on test coverage
15:31:57 [ht]
... We can respond to questions by increasing test coverage
15:32:23 [ht]
... an opportunistic approach -- test what seems tricky/controversial/novel to commentators
15:32:29 [ht]
HT: Likes the idea
15:33:25 [ht]
HT: I agree that the whole WG should be focussed on testing for the LC period
15:34:46 [ht]
MSM: That's OK by me, if the entire WG is willing
15:35:13 [ht]
HT: Anyone unhappy with guidance to the chair along these lines?
15:35:21 [ht]
HT: So RESOLVED
15:36:09 [Zakim]
-avernet
15:36:10 [Zakim]
-PGrosso
15:36:11 [ht]
HT: Congratulations all around
15:36:11 [Zakim]
-ruilopes
15:36:13 [Zakim]
-Alex_Milows
15:36:14 [Zakim]
-Andrew
15:36:15 [Zakim]
-richard
15:36:17 [Zakim]
-MoZ
15:36:18 [Zakim]
-Ht
15:36:19 [Zakim]
-MSM
15:36:21 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
15:36:23 [Zakim]
Attendees were Ht, Alex_Milows, PGrosso, avernet, [IPcaller], richard, ruilopes, Andrew, MoZ, MSM
15:37:51 [ht]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:37:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/09/13-xproc-minutes.html ht
15:37:59 [ht]
RRSAgent, make logs world-visible
15:39:31 [avernet]
avernet has left #xproc
15:51:42 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
15:51:49 [Zakim]
+Murray_Maloney
15:52:16 [Zakim]
-Murray_Maloney
15:52:17 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
15:52:18 [Zakim]
Attendees were Murray_Maloney
17:17:44 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has left #xproc
17:38:01 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #xproc
18:55:40 [alexmilowski_]
alexmilowski_ has joined #xproc
20:32:26 [avernet]
avernet has joined #xproc