14:59:12 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 14:59:12 logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-irc 14:59:29 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 14:59:29 Date: 6 Aug 2009 14:59:29 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-agenda 14:59:29 Meeting: 151 14:59:29 Chair: Norm 14:59:30 Scribe: Norm 14:59:32 ScribeNick: Norm 15:00:42 ht has joined #xproc 15:00:49 oops, how time do fly 15:00:54 running to grab T, brb 15:01:15 PGrosso has joined #xproc 15:01:26 ok 15:02:13 Zakim, this is xproc 15:02:13 ok, Norm; that matches XML_PMWG()11:00AM 15:05:11 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 15:05:20 Zakim, who's on the phone? 15:05:20 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Vojtech 15:06:29 +Alex_Milows 15:07:28 zakim, please call ht-781 15:07:29 ok, ht; the call is being made 15:07:31 +Ht 15:08:38 Present: Norm, Paul, Vojtech, Henry, Alex 15:08:45 Topic: Accept this agenda? 15:08:45 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/08/06-agenda 15:08:53 Accepted. 15:08:58 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 15:08:58 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/30-minutes 15:09:04 Accepted. 15:09:10 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 20 Aug 2009 15:09:30 Cancelling 13 Aug for Balisage 15:09:56 Henry gives regrets for 20 Aug, 27 Aug 15:10:35 Topic: 155 Circular and re-entrant libraries 15:11:01 Basically, what we've got doesn't work. Henry has made an alternate proposal. 15:11:17 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2009Aug/att-0000/import_algorithm.html 15:12:05 Vojtech: I think there's still an issue with nested pipelines. 15:12:27 Henry: I think there is a problem...but not with nested pipelines. 15:12:52 ...I don't think nested pipelines are a problem because the algorithm stops when it hits a p:pipeline child. 15:13:55 Henry: Consider a pipeline that has an import and a nested pipeline (as a sibling of import) 15:14:20 ...And that nested pipeline defines symbols (nested pipelines or an import of its own). 15:15:39 [pipe [pipe ][pipe ]] 15:16:45 Scribe struggles 15:17:00 Henry: The problem is that the algorithm as I specified it doesn't check the nested pipelines. 15:18:14 ...I think I know how to fix that without changing the algorithm, but we need a different set of initial conditions. 15:19:13 Henry: To check a pipeline, you need to know the exports of its parent and the URIs that were involved in checking that and you start with those. 15:19:48 Henry: I'll send another message in a little while with an update. 15:22:47 Vojtech: I'm happier with the new proposal, including Henry's addendum. I think it's easier to understand. 15:22:52 Norm: Yes, I think so to. 15:23:30 Norm: Ok, we'll continue the review in email and touch base again at the next telcon. 15:24:00 Topic: 148 Parameter names cannot be in the XProc namespace 15:24:24 Vojtech: For options and variables, the spec says they can't be in the XProc namespace. It says the same thing about paramters. 15:24:38 ...But I don't think it can be a *static* error for parameters. 15:25:05 Norm: Right. It's clearly not a static error. 15:25:17 Vojtech: Is it really necessary to say this about parameters? 15:26:25 Norm: We own it, that's why we say it, but I don't feel strongly about it. 15:27:56 Norm: Would anyone ever need to write a stylesheet that used parameters in the XProc namespace? 15:28:12 ...I can't think of a reason. I'm inclined to leave the prohibition but make the parameter case dynamic. 15:28:18 Vojtech: But leave options and variables static? 15:28:20 Norm: Yes. 15:28:36 Propsal: Keept he prohibition, create a new dynamic error for the parameters case. 15:28:49 Accepted. 15:28:55 s/Keept he/Keep the/ 15:29:31 Topic: 149 UUID 15:29:36 Norm: I think this is editorial. 15:29:48 Alex: I can dig up a normative reference and send it to you. 15:29:53 Norm: Thanks! 15:30:06 ACTION: Alex to find a normative reference for UUID algorithms. 15:30:29 Topic: 150 err:XD0002 and err:XD0011 and err:XD0029 15:33:00 Norm: Yes, it seems odd to have all three. We could lose 2 or 11 and 29 I think. 15:33:44 Norm: I guess losing 2 is the way to go, it's in a part of the spec distant from the other constraints on p:document and p:data. 15:34:44 Vojtech: I would remove 2. 15:35:02 Proposal: Remove err:XD0002 in favor of the two more specific errors, 11 and 29. 15:35:13 Accepted. 15:35:35 Odd: Here's the official spec for UUIDs: http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.667-200808-I/en 15:35:40 Topic: 151: Why is err:XC0001 a step error? 15:37:44 Vojtech explains why they should both be dynamic errors. 15:37:48 Norm: I think you're right. 15:38:08 Proposal: Rename err:XC0001 to some appropriate dynamic error number 15:39:42 Norm: Actually, I think err:XC0001 is simply subsumed by err:XD0020. There's no need to call out method if we aren't going to call out all of them. 15:40:50 Vojtech: Do we need two: one for invalid values and one for unsupported values? 15:41:06 Norm: I don't know, I'm not sure users will get value out of that distinction. 15:42:10 Vojtech: When I was writing the serialization tests, I had problems telling them apart. 15:42:19 Norm: Sold! 15:42:41 Proposal: Remove err:XC0001 using err:XD0020 there instead. 15:42:51 Accepted. 15:43:04 Topic: 152: p:http-request and err:XC0020 15:44:47 Alex: In both cases, it's about making sure the values are consistent. 15:45:52 Norm: Does anyone diagree that those are two cases of the same error, that is that one error code is sufficient. 15:46:45 Vojtech: The first definition talks specifically about the header value. 15:47:11 Alex: The spirit of this error is that to make a request, you have to get all the packaging right: headers, options, etc. have to match. 15:47:34 ...The first mention talks about headers, but the boundry and a few other things also come into play. 15:48:07 Norm: I'm happy to reword err:XC0020 so that it's clear that what we're testing is general consistency in a request. 15:48:49 Proposal: Generalize err:XC0020 so that it's more appropriate for both cases. 15:49:03 Accepted. 15:49:15 ACTION: Norm to generalize err:XC0020 appropriately. 15:49:57 Topic: 156: What nodes does replace act on? 15:50:17 Vojtech: The replace step talks about the "elements" that it matches, but later on it talks about comments, PIs, text, etc. 15:50:22 ...I think it should talk about nodes instead of elements. 15:50:25 Norm: Sounds right to me. 15:50:59 Proposal: Replace elements with nodes where appropropriate to make the description accurately reflect what the step does. 15:51:42 Accepted. 15:51:55 Topic: Any other business? 15:52:49 Norm: We're getting very close to being done. Maybe September? I'll have a more coherent report of coverage by the next meeting. 15:52:56 No other business heard. 15:53:37 Alex: Who's going to Balisage? 15:53:43 Norm: I think it's you and I and Mohamed. 15:53:58 Adjourned. 15:54:01 -Ht 15:54:02 -Alex_Milows 15:54:02 -Norm 15:54:02 -Vojtech 15:54:03 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 15:54:04 Attendees were Norm, Vojtech, PGrosso, Alex_Milows, Ht 15:54:10 RRSAgent, set logs world visible 15:54:14 RRSAgent, draft minutes 15:54:14 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/08/06-xproc-minutes.html Norm 15:56:26 PGrosso has left #xproc 15:56:45 alexmilowski has left #xproc 17:30:51 Zakim has left #xproc 17:54:06 Norm has left #xproc 18:35:03 ht has left #xproc