IRC log of xproc on 2010-04-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:00:26 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #xproc
15:00:26 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2010/04/15-xproc-irc
15:00:32 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #xproc
15:00:54 [Norm]
zakim, this will be xproc
15:00:59 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has joined #xproc
15:01:16 [Zakim]
ok, Norm; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start now
15:01:41 [ht]
ht has joined #xproc
15:01:46 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started
15:01:48 [Zakim]
+??P27
15:01:50 [Zakim]
+[ArborText]
15:01:57 [ht]
zakim, please call ht-781
15:02:02 [Zakim]
ok, ht; the call is being made
15:02:04 [Zakim]
+Ht
15:02:38 [Zakim]
+Norm
15:02:51 [Norm]
Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
15:02:51 [Norm]
Date: 15 Apr 2010
15:02:51 [Norm]
Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/04/15-agenda
15:02:51 [Norm]
Meeting: 171
15:02:51 [Norm]
Chair: Norm
15:02:52 [Norm]
Scribe: Norm
15:02:54 [Norm]
ScribeNick: Norm
15:04:00 [Vojtech]
Vojtech has joined #xproc
15:04:24 [Zakim]
+Murray_Maloney
15:04:51 [Norm]
zakim, who's on the phone?
15:05:16 [Zakim]
+Vojtech
15:05:18 [Zakim]
On the phone I see PGrosso, alexmilowski, Ht, Norm, Murray_Maloney, Vojtech
15:06:04 [Norm]
Present: Paul, Alex, Henry, Norm, Murray, Vojtech
15:06:08 [Norm]
Regrets: Mohamed
15:06:16 [Norm]
Topic: Accept this agenda?
15:06:16 [Norm]
-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/04/15-agenda
15:06:20 [Norm]
Accepted.
15:06:26 [Norm]
Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting?
15:06:26 [Norm]
-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2010/02/08-minutes
15:06:29 [Norm]
Accepted.
15:06:35 [Norm]
Topic: Next meeting: telcon, 22 Apr 2010?
15:06:44 [Norm]
No regrets heard.
15:06:52 [Norm]
Topic: Status update on PR request
15:07:48 [Norm]
Norm: Voting closes today. We've got 12 votes in favor, 1 with a change (the bug we want to fix) and 2 explicit abstentions.
15:08:39 [Norm]
Henry: I hope I did what was needed.
15:08:46 [Norm]
Norm: Yes. Looks fine to me, thanks Henry
15:08:58 [Norm]
-> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/xproc/results
15:09:11 [Norm]
Topic: The default XML processing model
15:10:49 [Norm]
-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/defproc.html
15:11:35 [Norm]
Henry: I basically did what we said. We agreed to two changes.
15:12:04 [Norm]
...Make a new title, and this really is processor profiles, so I chose "XML processor profiles". The XML spec calls what we're talking about "an XML processor".
15:12:10 [Norm]
...I'm not wedded to the name.
15:12:31 [Norm]
...The other thing I did was add another profile.
15:12:58 [Norm]
...I tried to add another profile, to handle xml-stylesheet, but discovered that it was quite difficult.
15:13:37 [Norm]
...What the stylesheet PI does is lay off responsibility to other specs.
15:14:19 [Norm]
Henry: I've reduced my expectations to just trying to get the correct infoset (or data model of choice). Once youv'e applied a stylesheet, or a GRDDL, it's not really "this" document anymore.
15:14:51 [Norm]
...My realizaation is that what I wanted to do with this spec was focus on getting the correct infoset. The fact that I couldn't do the stylesheet story in this spec didn't bother me as much as I thought it would.
15:15:38 [Norm]
...I also had the minor insight that if I was writing the media type registration for, say text/css, I might say something about the processing model profile but that would be in my spec, not in this spec.
15:16:23 [Norm]
Murray: Are there two or three profiles?
15:16:38 [Norm]
Henry: Two, and a discussion of what might be in some other profile.
15:17:08 [Norm]
Murray: I'm sort of sympathetic to the ideas that Henry expressed. I wonder if Paul agrees?
15:17:50 [Norm]
Paul: We can write a pipeline that tells you what to do with an XML document and a stylesheet PI, right?
15:18:05 [Norm]
Norm: Well, for some PIs. For an XSL stylesheet, yes, but for CSS, it's less clear.
15:18:52 [Norm]
Murray: You can load the pipeline into XSL or set a flag to indicate that it was amenable for XSL processing.
15:19:03 [Norm]
Norm: Yes, you could set a variable or option.
15:19:29 [Norm]
Murray: I thought one of the things you could do with the processing model is determine what kind of processing it's eligable for.
15:19:45 [Norm]
...So it might say that XSL was possible, or GRDDL, or other things.
15:20:06 [ht]
Murray is enumerating some things of the sort which I called in a TAG musing "elaboration signals" -- things which signal the possibility of further processing
15:20:35 [ht]
... the use of certain elements from the XML Encryption namespace is another one
15:20:38 [Norm]
Murray: Would it be useful to write that pipeline?
15:21:12 [Norm]
Henry: Two years ago, when I was trying to get my head around this with my TAG hat on, I produced the elaborated infoset document.
15:21:28 [Norm]
...There's a notion in that which I think I called "elaboration signals". Murray's just reconstructed that idea.
15:21:45 [Norm]
...You've started to list the things that might be in the document that are signals for future processing. For example, encryption.
15:22:14 [Norm]
Henry: Yes, I think that's a useful idea. I've never been able to get anywhere beyond the observation that there are these things.
15:22:45 [Norm]
...It's always seemed to be the case that it's human beings that make the decision about what to do.
15:23:11 [Norm]
Murray: From a QA perspective: the delta between what could be done and what was actually done could be interesting and useful.
15:24:07 [Norm]
...What Henry said earlier about the fact that what XSLT creates for styling is another document, with GRDDL, I guess the same thing is true.
15:24:23 [Norm]
...But in the GRDDL case, it's asserted to be a faithful rendition of the information in this document.
15:25:13 [Norm]
...Another thing about the infoset with respect to GRDDL is that GRDDL decided that you might not have expanded entities, or exposed fixed attributes, etc.
15:25:50 [Norm]
Henry: My inclination is not to bless that. Just because they did it doesn't mean we should make it easy.
15:26:09 [Norm]
...They're going below what we (I) think is the minimum.
15:26:27 [Norm]
Murray: We could give it a name and then explain why you shouldn't use it.
15:29:05 [Norm]
Norm: My concern is that you can't process documents that contain unexpanded entity references. Or documents that aren't namespace well-formed for that matter.
15:30:35 [Norm]
Some further discussion about what the minimum profile means: it expands all entities, fills in attribute default values, etc.
15:30:50 [Norm]
Henry: On a completely different topic, what should our short name be?
15:31:10 [Norm]
Henry: I'm tempted by xprof, but I think the linguistic similarity to 'xproc' is too confusing.
15:31:31 [Norm]
Paul: I suggested 'xml-proc-prof'. An abbreviation of processing profile.
15:31:50 [Norm]
Norm: How about 'xmlprofiles'
15:31:56 [alexmilowski]
xmlpp
15:32:03 [Norm]
Murray: It's not an XML profile, it's an XML processing profile.
15:32:18 [Norm]
...And why profile not model?
15:32:53 [Norm]
Henry: My reasoning was that when a spec gives you a set of choices, which is what the XML spec does, then a particular set of values for those choices is what I undersatnd is meant by the word "profile"
15:33:16 [Norm]
...Model is just one of those generic words that's lost all meaning. What would it mean not to be a model? It's just a noun to put after processor.
15:34:35 [Norm]
Norm: Assuming we clean up the editorial issues, would anyone object to publishing this as the first public working draft?
15:35:12 [Norm]
Alex: I really wonder about the xml stylesheet PI issue. I would really like to say something about what browsers do, but maybe that's more than we can achieve.
15:35:19 [Norm]
Murray: Browsers don't do any of this, do they?
15:35:30 [Norm]
Alex: Web browsers do more-or-less apply the XML stylesheet PI.
15:38:27 [Norm]
Some wandering discussion of user agents, media types, stylesheets, validation, etc.
15:39:35 [Norm]
Alex: If we had a processor profile for "apply style" then what the user agent does could be described as "select a stylesheet, through some implementation defined means" then do the "apply stylesheet" profile.
15:40:15 [Norm]
Henry: What I'd like to do is take this document and see if we can get other specs to reference it: HTML5, xxx+XML media types, etc.
15:40:25 [Norm]
Alex: I don't disagree, I just don't know if section 4 needs some tweaking.
15:42:49 [Norm]
Norm: I'd like it out sooner and smaller so we can see what way the community goes with it.
15:43:02 [Norm]
... The community might love it or hate it and I can't predict which.
15:44:31 [Norm]
Murray: I'd like to publish this soon. I'd like to see more detail in it about what we do with the infoset at each step in the process.
15:45:02 [Norm]
...Maybe with a catalog of infoset changes. And I wonder if as part of this process we wouldn't discover new info items to add to the infoset.
15:45:17 [Norm]
...Perhaps we discover that we set particular flags for every pipeline, shouldn't they just be in the infoset.
15:46:08 [Norm]
Norm: Does anyone object to making more-or-less this document our FPWD?
15:46:30 [Norm]
Murray: How about adding a paragraph or two about XML functions and how this document doesn't do that.
15:47:01 [Norm]
No objections heard.
15:47:17 [Norm]
Norm: Now we need a short name.
15:48:01 [ht]
ht has joined #xproc
15:48:03 [Norm]
Some proposals: xml-proc-prof, xppf,
15:48:36 [Norm]
xml-processor-profiles
15:48:43 [Norm]
xmlprocessorpofiles
15:48:52 [Norm]
xml-processing-best-practices
15:49:01 [alexmilowski]
xml-proc-profiles
15:49:27 [Norm]
xpm
15:50:36 [Norm]
Murray/Henry wrangle a little bit over the title again "profile" vs "model"
15:51:49 [Norm]
Henry: My focus here is what are the invariants that you can count on in the information you get, not how you get it.
15:51:56 [Norm]
...I don't see this as a collection of pipelines
15:54:25 [alexmilowski]
"Pipelines for XML Processors" :)
15:54:30 [Norm]
xproc-profiles
15:54:38 [Norm]
profiles-of-xml
15:54:52 [Vojtech]
xmlp?
15:56:13 [PGrosso]
I'm liking xml-proc-profiles
15:56:25 [ht]
xml-proc-profiles
15:56:45 [Norm]
Proposal: We use the short name xml-proc-profiles
15:56:46 [Vojtech]
the short name most likely will contain 'xml' and 'processing', the question is about 'model' and 'profile' - so I wouldn't include it
15:58:00 [Norm]
Accepted.
15:59:00 [Norm]
Henry: I say we get this out by Monday and if no one objects before Wednesday then we go forward.
15:59:12 [Norm]
Norm: Anyone object to that?
15:59:14 [Norm]
None heard.
15:59:46 [Norm]
Topic: Any other business?
16:00:18 [alexmilowski]
Gotta run. Bye.
16:00:20 [Norm]
None heard.
16:00:22 [Zakim]
-Murray_Maloney
16:00:23 [Zakim]
-alexmilowski
16:00:23 [Zakim]
-PGrosso
16:00:23 [Norm]
Adjourned
16:00:24 [Zakim]
-Vojtech
16:00:24 [Zakim]
-Ht
16:00:27 [Norm]
rrsagent, set logs world-visible
16:00:31 [Norm]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:00:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2010/04/15-xproc-minutes.html Norm
16:00:35 [Zakim]
-Norm
16:00:36 [Zakim]
XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
16:00:37 [Zakim]
Attendees were PGrosso, Ht, alexmilowski, Norm, Murray_Maloney, Vojtech
16:01:26 [PGrosso]
PGrosso has left #xproc
17:21:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #xproc
17:35:50 [Norm]
rrsagent, bye
17:35:50 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items