IRC log of xproc on 2008-11-20

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:50:46 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
15:50:46 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:50:49 [Norm]
Zakim, this will be xproc
15:50:49 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
15:50:56 [Norm]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
15:50:56 [Norm]
Date: 20 Nov 2008
15:50:56 [Norm]
15:50:56 [Norm]
Meeting: 130
15:50:56 [Norm]
Chair: Norm
15:50:56 [Norm]
Scribe: Norm
15:50:58 [Norm]
ScribeNick: Norm
15:51:17 [Norm]
Norm has changed the topic to: XProc WG meets 20 Nov:
15:51:28 [Norm]
Regrets: Michael
15:58:35 [MoZ]
MoZ has joined #xproc
15:58:51 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
15:58:58 [Zakim]
15:59:36 [MoZ]
Zakim, what is the code ?
15:59:36 [Zakim]
the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.117.370.6152), MoZ
16:00:30 [Zakim]
16:00:38 [Zakim]
16:00:39 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has joined #xproc
16:01:01 [Zakim]
16:03:52 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
16:03:52 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
16:03:54 [Zakim]
16:03:59 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Mohamed, Alex, Paul, Henry
16:04:25 [Norm]
Topic: Accept this agenda?
16:04:25 [Norm]
16:04:39 [Norm]
16:04:45 [Norm]
Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
16:04:45 [Norm]
16:05:08 [Norm]
16:05:15 [Norm]
Topic: Next meeting: telcon 4 Dec 2008?
16:05:28 [Norm]
Skipping 27 Nov, US Thanksgiving.
16:05:38 [Norm]
No regrets heard.
16:05:48 [Norm]
Topic: Fixing static context before CR
16:05:55 [Norm]
16:07:00 [Norm]
Norm explains the situation and proposes to strike "or made available through p:namespaces"
16:07:06 [Norm]
16:07:21 [Norm]
Topic: Fixing p:wrap match="/"
16:07:43 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
16:08:11 [Norm]
Norm explains that it's only about user convenience.
16:08:18 [Zakim]
16:08:19 [richard]
zakim, ? is me
16:08:19 [Zakim]
+richard; got it
16:08:27 [Norm]
Present: Norm, Mohamed, Alex, Paul, Henry, Richard
16:08:48 [Norm]
Henry suggests that since XSLT 2.0 allows something similar, we should too.
16:09:09 [Zakim]
16:09:11 [Norm]
Alex: I agree with Henry
16:10:08 [Norm]
Norm: If you match /, you get all the nodes in the document.
16:10:25 [Norm]
Mohamed: Is it the only place where we should do this?
16:10:46 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
16:10:48 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
16:10:48 [Zakim]
16:11:28 [Norm]
Norm: After a quick check, I don't see any others that make any sense.
16:12:01 [Norm]
Proposal: Make the change.
16:12:13 [Norm]
Mohamed: What about www-form-url-encode.
16:13:31 [Norm]
Norm: Well...www-form-url-encode does allow match=/, but will invariably produce a dynamic error if you do that.
16:13:37 [Norm]
16:13:51 [Norm]
Topic: Allow extension steps to use c: namespace
16:13:52 [Zakim]
16:15:15 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
16:15:15 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
16:15:16 [Zakim]
16:15:22 [Norm]
16:16:08 [Norm]
Norm: I think we should allow people to reuse the c: namespace.
16:16:24 [Norm]
Alex: I wouldn't want to restrict what people can produce from their steps.
16:16:51 [Norm]
Mohamed: We have three namespaces, on two of them we explicitly don't want people to reuse them.
16:18:09 [Norm]
Richard: What about in inline documents?
16:18:33 [Norm]
Norm: We're pretty clear that content in an inline is just content and we don't care what it is.
16:19:08 [Norm]
Mohamed: If we used the c: namespace and we use an element that's already been defined in this specification, can we add an attribute to it?
16:19:41 [Norm]
Henry: I think we should just say that common sense suggests that such usages shouldn't overlap with the uses defined in this spec.
16:19:52 [Norm]
s/spec./spec. unless the usage is identical./
16:19:58 [Norm]
Alex: I'm with Henry.
16:21:56 [Norm]
Mohamed: Today we don't mandate that if you extend the output of an existing step, you must use an extension attribute. So you could put a @type on c:result and that might effect interoperability.
16:22:27 [Norm]
Norm: This is a bigger can of worms than I thought, perhaps we shouldn't say anything.
16:23:03 [Norm]
Norm: If we do this later, does it push us back in the process?
16:23:15 [Norm]
Henry: No, how could it effect the conformance of an implementation. This isn't a big deal.
16:23:21 [richard]
richard has joined #xproc
16:23:36 [richard]
X crashed :-(
16:23:41 [Norm]
Norm: So do we want to try to nail this down today, or come back to it later.
16:23:47 [Norm]
Henry: I'm fine to come back later
16:24:00 [Norm]
Mohamed: Me too.
16:24:05 [Norm]
Norm: Ok, we'll leave this.
16:24:24 [Norm]
Topic: Any other comments on the CR draft.
16:24:35 [Norm]
16:25:06 [Norm]
Norm: Any comments?
16:25:11 [Norm]
Mohamed: Congratulations!
16:26:47 [Norm]
Norm: Congrats to us all.
16:27:01 [Norm]
Topic: Any other business?
16:27:36 [Norm]
Mohamed: What's the future work?
16:27:57 [Norm]
Norm: We need to get the test suite finished, we need to encourage implementors, and we need to turn our attention to the default XML processing model.
16:28:09 [Norm]
16:28:17 [Norm]
RRSAgent, please set logs world-visible
16:28:18 [Zakim]
16:28:20 [Zakim]
16:28:20 [Zakim]
16:28:21 [Norm]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:28:21 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Norm
16:30:06 [Zakim]
16:30:06 [Zakim]
16:30:08 [Zakim]
16:30:08 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
16:30:09 [Zakim]
Attendees were Norm, MoZ, Alex_Milows, PGrosso, Ht, richard
16:30:15 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has left #xproc