IRC log of xproc on 2008-06-05
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:51:00 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #xproc
- 14:51:00 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-xproc-irc
- 14:51:02 [Norm]
- Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
- 14:51:02 [Norm]
- Date: 5 June 2008
- 14:51:02 [Norm]
- Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/06/05-agenda
- 14:51:02 [Norm]
- Meeting: 114
- 14:51:02 [Norm]
- Chair: Norm
- 14:51:03 [Norm]
- Scribe: Norm
- 14:51:07 [Norm]
- ScribeNick: Norm
- 14:56:45 [ruilopes]
- ruilopes has joined #xproc
- 14:57:35 [Vojtech]
- Vojtech has joined #xproc
- 14:58:27 [Norm]
- Zakim, this will be xproc
- 14:58:27 [Zakim]
- ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
- 14:58:33 [Zakim]
- XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
- 14:58:38 [Zakim]
- +Vojtech
- 14:58:40 [Zakim]
- +Norm
- 15:00:14 [Norm]
- Regrets: Paul
- 15:02:56 [AndrewF]
- AndrewF has joined #xproc
- 15:03:36 [Zakim]
- +??P36
- 15:03:42 [AndrewF]
- zakim, ? is Andrew
- 15:03:42 [Zakim]
- +Andrew; got it
- 15:05:03 [ruilopes]
- ruilopes has joined #xproc
- 15:05:41 [Zakim]
- + +1.857.362.aaaa
- 15:06:01 [Norm]
- Zakim, aaa is ruilopes
- 15:06:01 [Zakim]
- sorry, Norm, I do not recognize a party named 'aaa'
- 15:06:05 [Norm]
- Zakim, aaaa is ruilopes
- 15:06:05 [Zakim]
- +ruilopes; got it
- 15:06:21 [ht]
- zakim, please call ht-781
- 15:06:21 [Zakim]
- ok, ht; the call is being made
- 15:06:23 [Zakim]
- +Ht
- 15:06:56 [Norm]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:06:56 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Norm, Vojtech, Andrew, ruilopes, Ht
- 15:07:34 [Norm]
- Present: Norm, Vojtech, Andrew, Rui, Henry, Richard
- 15:07:45 [Norm]
- Topic: Accept this agenda?
- 15:07:45 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/06/05-agenda
- 15:07:57 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:08:02 [Norm]
- Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
- 15:08:02 [Norm]
- -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/05/29-minutes
- 15:08:11 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:08:14 [richard]
- richard has joined #xproc
- 15:08:23 [Norm]
- Topic: Next meeting: 12 June 2008
- 15:08:38 [Zakim]
- +??P15
- 15:08:41 [richard]
- zakim, ? is me
- 15:08:41 [Zakim]
- +richard; got it
- 15:08:44 [Norm]
- Norm gives likely regrets
- 15:09:02 [Norm]
- Henry to chair if Norm sends an agenda in time
- 15:09:26 [Norm]
- Rui gives regrets for 12 June
- 15:09:35 [Norm]
- Andrew gives regrets for 12, 19 June
- 15:10:16 [Norm]
- Topic: Kind of node matched
- 15:10:28 [Norm]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008May/0035.html
- 15:11:02 [Norm]
- Norm: I think the thrust here is that we should be more explicit in all our steps
- 15:11:25 [Norm]
- Henry: If it is the case that there's a majority case, then we could document that and only document exceptions
- 15:12:38 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to incorporate the suggestion to clarify the types of nodes matched by the steps into the next draft
- 15:14:33 [Norm]
- Some discussion of (public-)xproc-dev@w3.org list; action on Henry ongoing
- 15:15:27 [Norm]
- Vojtech: We should align error codes for matched nodes of the wrong type.
- 15:15:40 [Norm]
- Norm: So a single error code for "you got the node type wrong"?
- 15:15:53 [Norm]
- Vojtech: Or one for each kind of error.
- 15:16:40 [Norm]
- Norm: I think that's a good idea.
- 15:17:22 [Norm]
- Henry: We could have errors for text-node-not-allowed, element-node-not-allowed, etc.
- 15:17:32 [Norm]
- Norm: Ok, I agree that's more informative.
- 15:18:19 [Norm]
- Proposal: Replace random dynamic errors for this case with a set of five, one for each node type.
- 15:18:34 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:18:53 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to replace the random dynamic errors with the five so agreed
- 15:19:03 [Norm]
- Topic: p:pack
- 15:19:56 [Norm]
- Wait until Mohamed is present,
- 15:20:00 [Norm]
- s/present,/present./
- 15:20:09 [Norm]
- Topic: pfx:atomic-step
- 15:20:53 [Norm]
- Vojech: I think it's about the same prefix that we're using for built-in steps and extension steps.
- 15:21:36 [MoZ]
- MoZ has joined #xproc
- 15:21:46 [Norm]
- Norm: Right. I'll fix that.
- 15:22:18 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to fix the patterns so that they don't have the same prefix in 4.7 and 4.8
- 15:22:32 [Norm]
- MoZ, is that what you wanted for the pfx:atomic-step comment?
- 15:22:49 [Norm]
- Topic: Questions about p:http-request
- 15:23:22 [Norm]
- Vojtech: A couple of points; first, one of the examples is still using c:http-request/c:http-request.
- 15:23:25 [Norm]
- Norm: Ok, that's a bug.
- 15:24:20 [MoZ]
- Norm, sorry I just joined so I don't have access to IRC history, I'll take a look to the minutes after the telcon
- 15:24:25 [Norm]
- Vojtech: In Section 7.1.9.3 there's an attribute @detailed which if it's set to false, it's not clear what the step should generate.
- 15:25:42 [Norm]
- Vojtech: I think that if detailed=false, the c:response is not generated.
- 15:25:47 [Norm]
- ACTION: Alex to investigate
- 15:27:13 [Norm]
- Vojtech: And then there's the question of what to do if the response is a multipart response where there are nested multiparts.
- 15:27:51 [Norm]
- Norm: It's not immediately clear that that makes sense for us, but we should investigate.
- 15:28:03 [Norm]
- ACTION: Alex to investigate
- 15:28:19 [Norm]
- Vojtech: Two more things.
- 15:28:28 [MSM]
- zakim, please call MSM-617
- 15:28:28 [Zakim]
- ok, MSM; the call is being made
- 15:28:30 [Zakim]
- +MSM
- 15:29:01 [Norm]
- ...In Section 7.1.9.2 there are two conditions: if the content-type is XML or the encoding is base64 or not.
- 15:29:22 [Norm]
- ...Then different things can happen, but it seems to me that if the content-type is XML and encoding is base64 then the result is unspecified.
- 15:30:04 [Norm]
- Norm: I think the right thing is decode it and parse it, but we should say that.
- 15:30:08 [Norm]
- ACTION: Alex to fix.
- 15:30:43 [Norm]
- Vojtech: The last one is more of a question, in 7.1.9.4 there's a note about text/html
- 15:31:20 [Norm]
- ...that says it'll be base64 encoded. But earlier it says that text types aren't encoded that way.
- 15:31:27 [Norm]
- ...So I wonder what the right answer is.
- 15:32:13 [Norm]
- Norm: Yeah, that does seem strange. I'd have expected the text to just be escaped markup.
- 15:32:55 [Norm]
- Topic: Any other business
- 15:33:18 [Norm]
- None heard.
- 15:33:29 [Zakim]
- -MSM
- 15:33:30 [Zakim]
- -richard
- 15:33:32 [Zakim]
- -Norm
- 15:33:33 [Zakim]
- -Vojtech
- 15:33:35 [Zakim]
- -ruilopes
- 15:33:36 [Zakim]
- -Andrew
- 15:33:36 [Norm]
- RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
- 15:33:37 [Zakim]
- XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
- 15:33:38 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Vojtech, Norm, Andrew, +1.857.362.aaaa, ruilopes, Ht, richard, MSM
- 15:33:42 [Norm]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 15:33:42 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/06/05-xproc-minutes.html Norm
- 17:32:22 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #xproc
- 18:24:30 [MSM]
- MSM has joined #xproc