IRC log of xproc on 2008-05-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:57:25 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
14:57:25 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:57:32 [Norm]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
14:57:33 [Norm]
Date: 1 May 2008
14:57:33 [Norm]
14:57:33 [Norm]
Meeting: 110
14:57:33 [Norm]
Chair: Norm
14:57:33 [Norm]
Scribe: Norm
14:57:35 [Norm]
ScribeNick: Norm
14:59:00 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
14:59:07 [Zakim]
14:59:46 [Norm]
Regrets: Rui, Vojtech
14:59:56 [Zakim]
15:00:45 [alexmilowski]
alexmilowski has joined #xproc
15:01:07 [Zakim]
MoZ, you asked to be reminded at this time
15:01:58 [alexmilowski]
Huh... trying to call in... but not getting in...
15:02:05 [MoZ]
Thanks Zakim
15:02:07 [Norm]
try again :-)
15:02:16 [Zakim]
15:02:30 [Zakim]
+ +95247aaaa
15:02:36 [MoZ]
Zakim, aaaa is me
15:02:36 [Zakim]
+MoZ; got it
15:02:57 [Norm]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:02:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, alexmilowski, MoZ
15:03:50 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:03:50 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:03:52 [Zakim]
15:04:20 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alex, Mohamed,
15:04:21 [ht]
zakim, mute ht
15:04:21 [Zakim]
Ht should now be muted
15:04:24 [AndrewF]
AndrewF has joined #xproc
15:04:29 [ht]
zakim, disconnect ht
15:04:29 [Zakim]
Ht is being disconnected
15:04:31 [Zakim]
15:04:32 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alex, Mohamed, Henry, Andrew
15:04:57 [Zakim]
15:04:58 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:04:58 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:04:59 [Zakim]
15:05:01 [AndrewF]
zakim, ? is Andrew
15:05:01 [Zakim]
+Andrew; got it
15:05:19 [Norm]
Zakim, mute ht
15:05:19 [Zakim]
Ht should now be muted
15:05:28 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
15:05:37 [Zakim]
15:05:52 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alex, Mohamed, Henry, Andrew, Richard
15:05:57 [Zakim]
15:05:59 [richard]
zakim, ? is me
15:05:59 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
15:06:09 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:06:09 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:06:11 [Zakim]
15:06:31 [Norm]
Zakim, mute ht
15:06:31 [Zakim]
Ht should now be muted
15:06:37 [Norm]
ht, maybe you need to go to richard's office :-)
15:06:48 [Zakim]
15:07:14 [Norm]
Topic: Accept this agenda?
15:07:14 [Norm]
15:07:53 [Norm]
15:08:05 [Norm]
Norm's affiliation changes on Monday to Mark Logic, but he anticipates participating as usual.
15:08:09 [Zakim]
15:08:11 [Norm]
...without any changes.
15:08:32 [Norm]
Let's add the items that Mohamed posted if there's time.
15:09:00 [Norm]
Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
15:09:00 [Norm]
15:09:02 [Norm]
15:09:07 [Norm]
Topic: Next meeting: telcon 8 May 2008?
15:09:14 [Norm]
No regrets given.
15:09:24 [Norm]
Topic: New public working draft
15:09:26 [Norm]
Was published today!
15:09:54 [Norm]
Topic: Update to p:www-form-urlencode
15:10:07 [Norm]
15:10:39 [Norm]
Mohamed: I think URL encode would be useful if it could keep the content that is in the element that matches.
15:10:54 [Norm]
...The content could be, for example, the start of the URI.
15:12:14 [Norm]
Norm: What would the option contain?
15:12:25 [Norm]
Mohamed: My first idea was an option that says concatentate or not.
15:13:09 [Norm]
Alex: Why not do what we did for generate-id, where we have an XPath expression.
15:13:55 [MSM]
zakim, please call MSM-617
15:13:55 [Zakim]
ok, MSM; the call is being made
15:13:57 [Zakim]
15:14:01 [Norm]
Norm: Ugh. Seems like a lot of complexity for a fairly narrow case.
15:14:10 [ht]
So e.g. <p:w-f-e match="href"><p:with-param name="x" value="3"/></p:w-f-e>, with input <action href=""/>
15:14:28 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Paul, Alex, Mohamed, Henry, Andrew, Richard, Michael [xx:15-]
15:14:29 [ht]
would give <action href=""/>
15:15:09 [Norm]
Mohamed: I don't know if the "?" is in or not.
15:15:11 [Norm]
Norm: It's not.
15:15:24 [Norm]
Henry: Is there an obvious way to do this otherwise?
15:15:31 [Norm]
...It looks useful and hard to do any other way.
15:16:06 [Norm]
Alex: You can manipulate the parameter port beforehand in any way you want.
15:16:20 [Norm]
Norm: But this is for the GET case.
15:17:45 [Norm]
Alex: Right now you'd have to use XSLT to combine the two.
15:19:20 [Norm]
...I think we should keep these concerns separate, otherwise it's a slippery slope.
15:19:39 [Norm]
...We have the match because we do this operation and we have to put the encoded string somewhere.
15:19:56 [Norm]
...But outside of the scope of perform this algorithm, I'm not sure that we need to more.
15:20:13 [Norm]
...If that's the case, then we need a better insertion algorithm.
15:20:48 [Norm]
Mohamed argues about streamability.
15:21:21 [Norm]
Henry: Can we back up one step? I'd like to bring www-form-urldecode into the discussion. I think these ought to be as straightforwardly semetrical as we can make them.
15:22:54 [Norm]
Some discussion of where *decode* is likely to get its input.
15:23:44 [Norm]
Alex: It's there for symmetry. It's a bit of an edge case.
15:24:07 [Norm]
Henry: Then I want parse URL.
15:24:15 [Norm]
Alex: Yes, that would be good.
15:24:29 [Norm]
Norm: You can do what Mohamed wants with url-encode and string-replace
15:27:33 [Norm]
<p:url-form-encode name="foo">
15:27:33 [Norm]
15:27:33 [Norm]
15:27:33 [Norm]
<p:variable name="param" select="..."/>
15:27:33 [Norm]
<p:string-replace match="whatever">
15:27:34 [Norm]
<p:option name="replace" select="concat(.,$param)"/>
15:27:36 [Norm]
15:28:57 [Norm]
Norm: Are you satisfied with that, Mohamed?
15:29:09 [Norm]
Mohamed: Yes, but I think Henry has raised a good question about decoding.
15:29:30 [Norm]
Henry: XPath 2.0 will let you do it, it'd be very hard with XPath 1.0.
15:30:02 [Norm]
...There's definitely a slippery slope here.
15:30:23 [Norm]
Alex: There's a real need here, but it would be nice to have a URI-handling step that did a good job.
15:30:40 [Norm]
Norm: Stop. We're way off topic, if that's a good idea, someone write a proposal.
15:30:45 [ht]
What we're really talking about is microparsing and generating steps, I realise
15:31:49 [Norm]
So we're not changing anything about p:www-form-urlencode.
15:32:00 [Norm]
Topic: Short form of p:base-uri and p:resolve-uri
15:32:09 [Norm]
Norm: For consistency with XPath 2.0, I think we need to leave them.
15:32:57 [Norm]
...we said they'd be exactly the same as the 2.0 functions, so we shouldn't change them.
15:33:05 [Norm]
15:33:20 [Norm]
Topic: Support for other media types in p:unescape-markujp
15:33:23 [Norm]
15:33:32 [Norm]
15:34:23 [Norm]
Leave until Vojtech can be present.
15:34:39 [Norm]
Topic: Where are @psvi-required, @xpath-version, and @ignore-inline-prefixes allowed. And what are the rules for when they are nested?
15:35:37 [Norm]
Proposal: Allow them all on p:pipeline, p:declare-step, and p:library. Also allow ignore-inline-prefixes on p:inline.
15:36:32 [Norm]
Norm: I think a convenience for authors argument could be made for allowing ignore-inline-prefixes in more places, but I'm not going to make it.
15:36:51 [Norm]
Mohamed: I think Jeni's point was that you could group it better if it was allowed anywhere.
15:37:19 [Norm]
Richard: What about nesting?
15:37:26 [Norm]
Norm: We don't say anything yet, that we'll have to decide.
15:37:36 [Norm]
Henry: It's a lexically scoped union, so you can fix it.
15:37:57 [Norm]
Norm: Any comments about where I propose to allow them?
15:39:05 [Norm]
Mohamed: If it's allowed in p:declare-step, it will be allowed for both pipeline and atomic steps.
15:40:16 [Norm]
Norm: Yes, it'll apply to default binding for p:inline.
15:41:35 [Norm]
Some discussion of nesting for @xpath-version
15:42:08 [Norm]
Norm: Everyone content with where I said they could go?
15:42:10 [Norm]
15:42:20 [Norm]
Norm: I think we have a nesting story for xpath-version
15:42:37 [Norm]
Norm: I think the nesting story for ignore-inline-prefixes is lexical scope and union.
15:42:56 [Norm]
15:44:22 [Norm]
Henry: I think the semantics of psvi-required should be straightforward: if you don't have an implementation that can do PSVI, it's a dynamic error if you encounter one.
15:45:25 [Norm]
Alex: If you're impl supports PSVI, then every step in your impl is using that API. So having a psvi-required=false doesn't mean you're not going to construct one.
15:46:12 [Norm]
Norm: I think psvi-required=false is either pointless or serves only as documentation.
15:47:56 [Norm]
Some discussion of the semantics.
15:50:52 [Norm]
Alex: The psvi-required error is currently *static*
15:51:08 [Norm]
Norm: I think that's silly, it should be dynamic.
15:52:59 [Norm]
Proposed: Add a new system property taht says whetehr or not PSVIs are being used by this invocation fo this pipeline.
15:53:10 [MoZ]
15:53:21 [MoZ]
15:53:23 [Norm]
Accpted. Name to be determined by the editor.
15:55:41 [Norm]
Mohamed: I think it would be better if the property just told you whether or not the implmentation *can* do PSVIs.
15:59:02 [Norm]
Richard: What PSVI properties appear on documents?
15:59:18 [Norm]
Richard: So a p:wrap step will throw out the PSVI properties.
15:59:20 [Norm]
Henry: Right.
16:00:08 [Norm]
Richard: So PSVI properties only arise from the steps that say they can produce them and other steps don't change them.
16:00:11 [Norm]
Henry: I think that's right.
16:02:08 [Norm]
...Next week we should discuss what sort of preservation we want.
16:02:45 [Norm]
Propsal: We make the psvi-required error a dynamic error.
16:02:48 [Norm]
16:02:53 [Norm]
Topic: Any other business?
16:02:56 [Norm]
None heard.
16:03:01 [Zakim]
16:03:04 [Zakim]
16:03:05 [Zakim]
16:03:05 [Zakim]
16:03:06 [Zakim]
16:03:06 [Zakim]
16:03:07 [Zakim]
16:03:09 [Zakim]
16:03:10 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
16:03:11 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, PGrosso, alexmilowski, +95247aaaa, MoZ, Ht, Andrew, richard, MSM
16:04:04 [Norm]
16:04:10 [Norm]
RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
16:04:14 [Norm]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
16:04:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Norm
16:06:29 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has left #xproc
17:19:49 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #xproc