IRC log of xproc on 2008-01-17

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:54:17 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
15:54:17 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:54:20 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #xproc
15:54:25 [Norm]
Zakim, this will be xproc
15:54:25 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
15:54:55 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has joined #xproc
15:59:09 [avernet]
avernet has joined #xproc
16:00:35 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
16:00:42 [Zakim]
16:00:43 [Zakim]
16:01:18 [Norm]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:01:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso
16:02:12 [Zakim]
16:02:14 [avernet]
zakim, ? is avernet
16:02:14 [Zakim]
+avernet; got it
16:03:36 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
16:03:36 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
16:03:37 [Zakim]
16:03:50 [Zakim]
16:03:54 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
16:03:56 [ruilopes]
Zakim: ? is me
16:04:21 [AndrewF]
AndrewF has joined #xproc
16:04:23 [ruilopes]
Zakim, ? is me
16:04:23 [Zakim]
+ruilopes; got it
16:04:26 [Zakim]
16:04:28 [richard]
zakim, ? is me
16:04:31 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
16:04:57 [Zakim]
16:04:59 [AndrewF]
zakim, ? is Andrew
16:04:59 [Zakim]
+Andrew; got it
16:05:15 [Norm]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
16:05:15 [Norm]
Date: 17 January 2008
16:05:15 [Norm]
16:05:15 [Norm]
Meeting: 98
16:05:15 [Norm]
Chair: Norm
16:05:16 [Norm]
Scribe: Norm
16:05:18 [Norm]
ScribeNick: Norm
16:05:20 [Norm]
16:06:02 [Norm]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:06:02 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, avernet, Ht, ruilopes, richard, Andrew
16:06:21 [Zakim]
16:06:36 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alessandro, Henry, Rui, Richard, Andrew, Alex
16:07:03 [Norm]
Topic: Accept this agenda?
16:07:03 [Norm]
16:07:09 [Norm]
16:07:27 [Norm]
Henry wants to talk viewport and for-each (viz comment 83)
16:07:32 [Norm]
Possibly also about comment 97.
16:07:41 [Norm]
Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
16:07:41 [Norm]
16:07:48 [Norm]
16:08:02 [Norm]
Topic: Next meeting: telcon 24 January 2008?
16:08:09 [Norm]
Paul gives regrets.
16:08:30 [Norm]
Topic: Review of most recent editor's draft.
16:08:37 [Norm]
Editor apologizes that it remains incomplete.
16:09:05 [Norm]
Topic: Viewport and for-each
16:09:42 [Norm]
Henry: Thinking about this a little bit reveals a problem because of the schizophrenic nature of the output decls on viewport/for-each
16:10:06 [Norm]
...Such declarations face both ways, they do two jobs: they tell the viewport semantics where to get the documents to plug into the gaps of the original input doc.
16:10:25 [Norm]
...You need this if you don't want the primary output of the last step in your subpipeline to give you the result.
16:10:33 [Norm]
...That's the content of the output declaration.
16:11:06 [Norm]
...The other thing it does is face outward to tell you things about the output of the viewport itself. In particular, to give it a name so that you can reference it from some other sibling step.
16:11:31 [Norm]
Henry: These two functions are independent and semantically quite distinct, but they're folded together here.
16:11:50 [Norm]
...In viewport, in which direction does the sequence attribute point?
16:12:00 [MSM]
zakim, please call MSM-Office
16:12:00 [Zakim]
ok, MSM; the call is being made
16:12:01 [Zakim]
16:12:19 [MSM]
zakim, mute me
16:12:19 [Zakim]
MSM should now be muted
16:12:29 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alessandro, Henry, Rui, Richard, Andrew, Alex, Michael
16:12:46 [Norm]
Henry: It only makes sense one way, of course.
16:13:07 [Norm]
...And the same question arises for 'primary', though it seems less significant there.
16:13:10 [Zakim]
16:13:40 [Norm]
Henry: For consistency, just as we have a fixed, you can't fuss with it, special input port that faces into the subpipeline, we should have a special output port for the step itself.
16:13:50 [Zakim]
16:13:51 [avernet]
zakim, ? is avernet
16:13:52 [Zakim]
+avernet; got it
16:14:29 [Norm]
...I propose that the spec for viewport/for-each should be changed to make it clear that p:output is only used inside. The output port of the step itself is 'result' and you can't change it.
16:14:44 [Norm]
Richard: That doesn't work for for-each because for-each can have multiple output ports.
16:15:00 [Norm]
Richard: There are two different output ports in viewport, the output port of the contained subpipeine and the output port of the viewport itself.
16:15:20 [Norm]
...The question is, to which of these do the declarations on p:output apply.
16:15:52 [Norm]
...In the case of viewport, there's always exactly one output from the viewport and its always one document. We should just say that it's always primary.
16:16:02 [Norm]
...Everything in the declaration applies to the contained pipeline.
16:16:17 [Norm]
...This would mean that you can't choose the name of the output of the viewport.
16:16:32 [Norm]
q+ to ask why you can't change its name
16:16:42 [Norm]
Richard: Why doesn't this problem arise for choose?
16:17:13 [Norm]
...Because after the test, the selected subpipeline replaces the original step. It behave as if just that had the selected pipeline in a group.
16:17:29 [Norm]
Richard: for-each is somewhere in between. It doesn't wrap its output, but it does get concatenated together into a sequence.
16:17:43 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has joined #xproc
16:17:55 [Norm]
...Whereas with choose, if the output of the when is a sequence then the output of a choose is a sequence. In a for-each, the output is always a sequence.
16:18:11 [Norm]
...We want for-each to be able to have several outputs, so we need to be able to specify the names
16:18:26 [Norm]
...Can we say that the output port serves double-duty for both the contained pipeline and the for-each itself.
16:18:52 [Norm]
...AFAICS, we can.
16:19:45 [Norm]
...It couldn't serve double-duty if we wanted them to have different properties.
16:20:00 [Norm]
...But we don't, because the only thing that's different is that we always want the outputs to be sequences.
16:21:40 [Norm]
Norm: Is the following summary correct, for viewport, the step output has the same name, is primary, and is not sequence. For for-each, we say it has the same name, it's primary if you said the inner one was, and it always produces a sequence.
16:21:58 [Norm]
Richard: That's different in one respect, Henry suggested that for viewport it should have a fixed name.
16:22:30 [Norm]
Henry: I hate this aspect of our design. But pretending that there's only one declaration when there are really two just seems very, very odd.
16:23:23 [Norm]
Richard: There's a substantial difference between the viewport and for-each cases. In the viewport case, the result doesn't really have anything to do with what was produced by the steps inside.
16:23:26 [Norm]
Norm: Yeah, ok.
16:23:53 [Norm]
Norm: So for viewport we say the name of the output fixed and is 'result'.
16:24:32 [Norm]
Does that resolve everything?
16:24:36 [Norm]
Richard/Henry: I think so.
16:25:11 [Norm]
Topic: Issue 97
16:25:48 [Norm]
16:26:24 [Norm]
Henry: Yes, there's definitely a point here.
16:27:32 [Norm]
Norm: But we do forbid empty pipelines.
16:28:05 [Norm]
Henry: But declare step isn't a compound step, so that doesn't really apply.
16:28:18 [Norm]
...So we should make that static error apply here too.
16:28:43 [Norm]
Henry: In any event, we need to clarify the case.
16:29:25 [Norm]
Norm mumbles a bit
16:29:50 [Norm]
Henry: The problem is that the implication in the text runs the wrong way. What needs to be said is that the implication runs both ways.
16:30:52 [Norm]
Topic: Editor's draft review
16:31:35 [Norm]
Henry: In 2.1, it used to say that extension elements had somewhat constrained semantics.
16:32:10 [Norm]
...We need to put those constraints in for p:pipeinfo
16:32:12 [Norm]
Norm: Yep.
16:33:05 [Norm]
Topic: Any other business?
16:33:57 [Norm]
Henry: There are a bunch of unclosed issues.
16:34:17 [Norm]
Norm: I think they'll be closed when I've implemented the decisions we've made
16:34:45 [Zakim]
16:34:47 [Zakim]
16:34:48 [Zakim]
16:34:50 [Zakim]
16:34:51 [Norm]
RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
16:34:54 [Zakim]
16:35:01 [Zakim]
16:35:03 [Zakim]
16:35:34 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has left #xproc
16:35:49 [Norm]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:35:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Norm
16:42:00 [Zakim]
16:42:02 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
16:42:03 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, PGrosso, avernet, Ht, ruilopes, richard, Andrew, Alex_Milows, MSM
16:46:19 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #xproc
17:11:32 [MoZ]
Zakim, this will be xproc
17:11:32 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, MoZ
17:11:45 [MoZ]
Zakim, this is xproc
17:11:45 [Zakim]
sorry, MoZ, I do not see a conference named 'xproc' in progress or scheduled at this time