15:01:24 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #xproc
15:01:24 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/10-xproc-irc
15:01:53 <alexmilowski> alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:01:59 <Zakim> +Jeroen
15:02:01 <Zakim> -Jeroen
15:02:02 <Zakim> +Jeroen
15:02:10 <Zakim> +Norm
15:02:16 <Zakim> +??P13
15:02:18 <ruilopes> Zakim, ?? is me
15:02:18 <Zakim> +ruilopes; got it
15:02:20 <Norm> Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
15:02:20 <Norm> Date: 10 Apr 2008
15:02:20 <Norm> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/10-agenda
15:02:20 <Norm> Meeting: 107
15:02:20 <Norm> Chair: Norm
15:02:21 <Norm> Scribe: Norm
15:02:23 <Norm> ScribeNick: Norm
15:02:58 <ht> zakim, please call ht-781
15:02:58 <Zakim> ok, ht; the call is being made
15:03:00 <Zakim> +Ht
15:03:00 <Norm> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:03:01 <Zakim> On the phone I see PGrosso, Jeroen, Norm, ruilopes, Ht (muted)
15:03:26 <Zakim> +alexmilowski
15:03:27 <Norm> Zakim, jeroen is Voycheck
15:03:29 <Zakim> +Voycheck; got it
15:03:35 <Norm> Zakim, jeroen is Vojteck
15:03:35 <Zakim> sorry, Norm, I do not recognize a party named 'jeroen'
15:03:43 <Norm> Zakim, Voycheck is Vojteck
15:03:43 <Zakim> +Vojteck; got it
15:03:45 <Zakim> +??P49
15:03:47 <richard> zakim, ? is me
15:03:47 <Zakim> +richard; got it
15:03:48 <Norm> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:03:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see PGrosso, Vojteck, Norm, ruilopes, Ht, alexmilowski, richard
15:04:03 <Norm> Zakim, Vojteck is Vojtech
15:04:11 <Zakim> sorry, Norm, I do not recognize a party named 'Vojteck'
15:04:29 <Norm> Present: Paul, Vojtech, Norm, Rui, Henry, Alex, Richard
15:04:34 <Norm> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:04:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see PGrosso, Vojtech, Norm, ruilopes, Ht, alexmilowski, richard
15:05:23 <AndrewF> AndrewF has joined #xproc
15:05:52 <Norm> Present: Paul, Vojtech, Norm, Rui, Henry, Alex, Richard, Andrew
15:06:11 <mzergaou> mzergaou has joined #xproc
15:06:17 <Zakim> +??P0
15:06:20 <AndrewF> zakim, ? is Andrew
15:06:20 <Zakim> +Andrew; got it
15:06:43 <MSM> zakim, please call MSM-617
15:06:43 <Zakim> ok, MSM; the call is being made
15:06:45 <Zakim> +MSM
15:07:09 <Norm> Present: Paul, Vojtech, Norm, Rui, Henry, Alex, Richard, Andrew, Michael
15:07:19 <Norm> Topic: Accept this agenda?
15:07:19 <Norm> -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/10-agenda
15:07:28 <Norm> Accepted
15:07:34 <Norm> Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
15:07:34 <Norm> -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/04/03-minutes
15:07:39 <Norm> Accepted
15:07:44 <Norm> Topic: Next meeting: telcon 17 April 2008?
15:08:09 <Norm> Rui gives regrets for 17 and 24 April.
15:08:19 <Norm> Alex gives regrets for 17 April.
15:08:35 <Norm> Topic: Adjusting base URIs
15:09:18 <Norm> Norm and Richard summarize.
15:09:41 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Apr/0018.html
15:11:31 <Norm> Richard: we need to say what the base URI of an empty document node is.
15:11:50 <Norm> ...And we need to say what happens if a document in the pipeline has no base URI.
15:12:58 <Norm> Richard: I also suggested a relativize function, but it turns out to be less useful, I think.
15:13:41 <Norm> Alex: Is there anything different from the XPath 2.0 functions?
15:13:52 <Norm> Richard: No, but they'll be available to XPath 1.0 processors if we put them in our namespace.
15:15:41 <Norm> Norm: I think we want to make sure that XPath 1.0 implementations can do these things.
15:15:47 <mzergaou> mzergaou has joined #xproc
15:15:50 <Norm> Alex: I think this is a slippery slope.
15:16:23 <Norm> Richard: If we don't put this in, XPath 1.0 impls will have to indepently invent this. This way, they have a uniform name and will be interoperable.
15:16:38 <Norm> ...Especially if we want to add some sort of relativize function.
15:17:06 <Norm> Alex: I think if we do this, we must make it exactly the same as the XPath 2.0 functions.
15:17:59 <richard> http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-operators/#func-base-uri
15:19:32 <Norm> Some discussion of whether we have to invent our own errors or return the XPath 2.0 errors.
15:20:03 <Norm> Norm: I'd be content to say that they return the F&O error codes.
15:20:26 <Norm> Norm: I could go the other way as well.
15:21:38 <Norm> The editor can decide when he's writing it up.
15:22:02 <Norm> Proposed: Add p:base-uri() and p:resolve-uri() as spec'd by Richard, to be the same as the XPath 2.0 functions.
15:22:17 <Norm> Accepted.
15:22:30 <Norm> Topic: Error ports
15:22:42 <Norm> -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Apr/0010.html
15:23:00 <Norm> Vojtech summarizes.
15:25:25 <Norm> Norm: The catch step can read from an error port, so I think it follows that there must be ports that connect to it. Even if the user can't read it.
15:26:22 <Norm> Some discussion of the motivation.
15:26:42 <Norm> Norm: Anyone have any thoughts on what we might do or say differently?
15:27:05 <Norm> Richard: I haven't looked in a while, there isn't any concept that a subpipeline aggregates the error ports of its steps or anything like that is there?
15:27:06 <Norm> Norm: No.
15:27:40 <Norm> Vojtech: I found this sentence most confusing "All steps have an implicit output port for reporting errors that must not be declared."
15:27:41 <mzergaou> mzergaou has joined #xproc
15:28:07 <Norm> Norm: Well, why don't we ask the editor to try to make this a little clearer.
15:28:51 <Norm> Richard: Minor point: sometimes we call the "error ports" and sometimes "error output ports". It would be good to make them consistent.
15:29:09 <Norm> Topic: Pipeline names/types
15:29:11 <Norm> Norm summarizes.
15:31:22 <Norm> Richard/Henry: Why can't the type be in no namespace?
15:32:03 <Norm> Norm: Well, because it helps prevent name collisions if you import them.
15:32:20 <Norm> Vojtech: The purpose of type is for importing, right?
15:32:22 <Norm> Richard: Yes.
15:32:50 <Norm> Vojtech: Removing the name is a bit strange, because you have to use this type. Everywhere else you use 'name'. I think that's a bit strange.
15:33:00 <Norm> ...We could have both.
15:33:21 <Norm> ...That's what I'd like: bring back the name.
15:33:44 <Norm> Henry: We thought it was confusing to have both name and type.
15:34:05 <Norm> Vojtech: You only need type for import.
15:34:24 <Norm> Richard: It used to be the other way around, if you had a name but not a type, the type got constructed.
15:35:04 <Norm> Richard: I agree it's dual purpose is a bit odd.
15:37:35 <Norm> Norm: We used to have all sorts of magic, but now that we've removed that, I think maybe the simplest thing would be to put back both name and type.
15:37:55 <Norm> Richard: We could have some magic syntax like "name='*'" to refer to the pipeline.
15:38:17 <Norm> Norm: Er, yeah, well.
15:39:11 <Norm> Richard: The name you invent isn't visible anywhere else, so that seems a bit odd.
15:39:21 <Norm> More discussion about leaving 'step=' off.
15:39:28 <Norm> s/"name=/"step=/
15:40:04 <Norm> What are the options:
15:40:08 <Norm> 1. The status quo
15:40:25 <Norm> 2. Leaving 'step=' out makes the pipe refer to the ancestor pipeline.
15:40:31 <Norm> 3. Use '*' as the name of the ancestor pipeline
15:40:42 <Norm> 4. We could have both name and type attributes, functioning independently
15:40:58 <Norm> Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:40:58 <Zakim> On the phone I see PGrosso, Vojtech, Norm, ruilopes, Ht, alexmilowski, richard, Andrew, MSM
15:44:19 <Norm> Vojtech: If we put the name attribute on the pipeline, then it would also have to be on declare step.
15:46:45 <Norm> <p:pipeline>
15:46:45 <Norm>   <p:declare-step name="foo" type="x:one"...>
15:46:45 <Norm>   <p:declare-step name="bar" type="x:two"...>
15:46:45 <Norm>   <p:declare-step name="baz" type="x:three"...>
15:46:45 <Norm>   <p:identity>
15:46:46 <Norm>     <p:input port="source">
15:46:48 <Norm>       <p:pipe step="foo" port="result"/>
15:46:50 <Norm>       ...
15:49:09 <Norm> Richard: I think the names on declare-step and pipeline shouldn't go in the surrounding environment.
15:49:50 <Zakim> -MSM
15:49:51 <Norm> Norm: We could add that rule.
15:50:20 <Norm> Norm: I don't think we have the idea that some steps are not steps.
15:50:35 <Norm> Henry: Sure we do. None of variable, pipelinfo, or documentation are steps.
15:52:06 <Norm> Straw poll: which do you prefer, 1-4.
15:53:26 <Norm> Results: five for choice 4 and two for choice 2
15:53:38 <Norm> Propose: we adopt choice 4.
15:53:47 <Norm> Accepted.
15:54:04 <Norm> Topic: Any other business?
15:54:41 <Norm> None.
15:54:50 <Norm> Adjourned.
15:54:55 <Zakim> -ruilopes
15:54:57 <Zakim> -Ht
15:54:58 <Zakim> -Norm
15:54:58 <Zakim> -richard
15:54:58 <Zakim> -PGrosso
15:55:00 <Zakim> -Vojtech
15:55:00 <Zakim> -Andrew
15:55:01 <Zakim> -alexmilowski
15:55:03 <Zakim> XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
15:55:04 <Zakim> Attendees were PGrosso, Norm, ruilopes, Ht, alexmilowski, richard, Vojtech, Andrew, MSM
15:55:17 <Norm> RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
15:55:21 <Norm> RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:55:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/10-xproc-minutes.html Norm
15:56:44 <MSM> MSM has joined #xproc
15:56:52 <Norm> We've adjourned, MSM
15:57:05 <mzergaou> mzergaou has joined #xproc
15:57:17 <Norm> RRSAgent, bye
15:57:17 <RRSAgent> I see no action items