13:56:52 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 13:56:52 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/04/14-xproc-irc 13:57:40 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 13:57:40 Date: 14 April 2011 13:57:40 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-agenda 13:57:40 Meeting: 191 13:57:40 Chair: Norm 13:57:41 Scribe: Norm 13:57:43 ScribeNick: Norm 13:59:14 XML_PMWG()10:00AM has now started 13:59:21 +Norm 13:59:30 Norm, I will only be able to attend on IRC 13:59:35 Ok. 14:00:36 PGrosso has joined #xproc 14:00:57 +[ArborText] 14:01:01 ht has joined #xproc 14:01:12 zakim, code? 14:01:12 the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.26.46.79.03 tel:+44.203.318.0479), ht 14:02:01 +??P10 14:02:06 zakim, ? is me 14:02:06 +ht; got it 14:02:22 +[IPcaller] 14:02:49 zakim, ipcaller is jfuller 14:02:49 +jfuller; got it 14:03:08 -jfuller 14:03:14 Vojtech has joined #xproc 14:03:18 zakim, who's talking? 14:03:32 Norm, listening for 10 seconds I could not identify any sounds 14:03:32 that made it go away 14:03:41 sorry jfuller it wasn't you :-) 14:04:06 hehe 14:04:07 +Jeroen 14:04:09 ok calling back 14:04:18 zakim, jeroen is Vojtech 14:04:21 +Vojtech; got it 14:04:25 -ht 14:04:37 zakim, who's on the phone? 14:04:37 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Vojtech 14:04:52 Present: Norm, Paul, Vojtech, Jim, Henry, Mohamed [irc only] 14:05:02 +??P56 14:05:07 zakim, ? is me 14:05:07 +ht; got it 14:05:26 +??P55 14:05:37 zakim, ??p55 jfuller 14:05:37 I don't understand '??p55 jfuller', Norm 14:05:42 zakim, ??p55 is jfuller 14:05:42 +jfuller; got it 14:05:57 zakim, who's here? 14:05:58 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Vojtech, ht (muted), jfuller 14:05:59 On IRC I see Vojtech, ht, PGrosso, RRSAgent, Zakim, MoZ, jfuller, Norm, Liam 14:07:07 Topic: Accept this agenda? 14:07:07 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/04/14-agenda.html 14:07:15 Accepted 14:07:19 accepted 14:07:21 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 14:07:21 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/02/24-minutes.html 14:07:29 Accepted. 14:07:41 Topic: Next meeting: telcon, 21 Apr 2011? 14:08:00 No regrets heard 14:08:08 Topic: Meeting at TPAC2011 14:08:48 Norm: I have asked for a meeting slot; I've pencilled us in for a f2f meeting during TPAC 2011, the first week of November in Santa Clara, CA, US. 14:09:02 Norm: Anyone know for sure their plans? 14:09:13 Paul: I expect to be there. 14:09:15 I hope to be, yes 14:09:17 Norm: So do I. 14:09:19 Jim: Probably not. 14:09:39 Vojtech: If there's work to do, then I can arrange something. 14:09:57 Norm: Ok, the onus is on me to get an agenda together int ime for you to make that decision. 14:11:02 Topic: Maps in XPath 3.0? 14:11:31 Norm: Do we have an opinion about maps? 14:11:47 Henry attempts to summarize the state of maps. 14:12:11 I like maps 14:12:53 Norm attempts as well. 14:17:04 Norm: In XProc 1.0, we only have strings and only XML data flows between steps so it's not clear how we would use them. 14:17:18 Vojtech: I had to implement maps as extension steps for some internal use cases. 14:17:33 ...I keep them as a global map because they were done as steps. 14:17:56 ...I think it would be good to have them, but it can be solved in an implementation-dependent way. 14:19:32 Norm: I think if there is an XProc 2.0, then one of the things we might do is relax the restriction on variables. At that point, we probably want maps. 14:20:01 Henry: I've done some explorations in this space and looked into the most efficient implementation. I think that's a good reason to have maps as a first class data structure. 14:20:27 ...If I, as a user, have a map with 10000 elements, I shouldn't have to worry about the most efficient way to update it. That's the implementation's job. 14:21:01 Some discussion of mutability. Maps aren't mutable. 14:21:45 I endorse John Snelson's observation wrt copying 14:21:55 Norm: It sounds like we'd support the idea of maps, but we can't use them in 1.0. 14:21:55 +1 14:22:14 Norm: Anyone object to me telling the XSLT and XQuery WGs that? 14:22:16 No objections heard. 14:23:16 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 14:23:29 Jim: XML serialization? 14:23:32 Norm: Yes, that's possible. 14:24:12 Jim: What about QNames? 14:24:21 Norm: There's a literal syntax for those too. 14:24:44 +[IPcaller] 14:24:54 Present: +Alex 14:25:18 Topic: Last call of XML processor profiles 14:25:31 Norm: Thank you Henry for doing all the heavy lifting in getting that spec out. 14:25:37 Henry: No problem, sorry it took so long. 14:25:39 Norm: No worries. 14:25:55 Topic: Recommended processor profile in the browser 14:26:20 Alex: I've been looking at the browser XML processor, specifically in WebKit. 14:26:33 ...The browsers don't like to go fetch external resources unless they absolutely have to. 14:26:40 ...In the case of HTML, you have to go get scripts and things. 14:27:00 ...But in the case of XML, that's not necessarily the case. In WebKit, they've just turned off processing external entities. 14:27:19 ...If we don't do that, then we can't do the Recommended profile. So which profile can I follow? 14:27:33 ...Then I realized that I lose XInclude and that's something that I think would be useful to have in the browser. 14:27:54 ...So I feel like I don't have a profile that fits a web browser where you don't go get external definitions but you would like XInclude. 14:28:15 ...Lots of languages these days aren't defined in terms of DTDs, so maybe it's a mistake to have them. 14:28:42 ...I looked a little bit at MathML, because they need entities and that's the main reason for the external subset. MathML 3 seems to just say "just use Unicode". 14:29:09 ...So I have a feeling we have a mismatch. 14:30:08 Alex: Henry, did you have specific things in mind besides math? 14:30:22 Henry: I don't want to lose it as a profile, because it continues to be the profile I want. I wish the browsers would implement it. 14:30:34 ...When I develop with standard DTDs, I can't stand the result to the browser, it's a real pain. 14:30:40 Alex: I hear what you're saying. 14:30:49 s/stand/just hand/ 14:31:15 ...If you use DTDs, you don't get the behavior you want. The real problem is how HTML is processed which doesn't need DTD processing. 14:31:31 ...XHTML is an XML language, and they don't want to go get external declarations in that case. 14:32:04 ...It turns out to be really complicated to get external declarations for XML but not for XHTML. So people just say they don't want to deal with DTDs. 14:32:12 ...I'm not sure what to say there. 14:32:15 Henry: Neither am I. 14:32:33 Henry: I not also John Cowan's comments that recently came in. He doesn't like the last one either. 14:32:40 ...He doesn't like the names full stop. 14:32:55 Norm: If all we had to do was change the names, that'd be lovely. 14:33:11 Norm: I don't know what to do about the browser case. 14:33:44 Henry: Going back to way back to one (but not the only) item that's near to the director's heart is the question of what infoset the author is committed to. 14:34:37 -jfuller 14:35:07 ...And my feeling is that it's pretty clear that its the last one and only the last one. Crucially, if i have a DTD in the document and in the external subset I define parity as a general entity who's value is "not" and I write "I do &parity;(insert inflamatory reference)" in a document, to what is the author committed? 14:35:20 ...Clearly it's not the version of the document that doesn't have the value for the entity. 14:35:46 Norm: Yeah. I think that's a pretty compelling argument for not "recommending" anything that doesn't do the external subset. 14:36:11 Alex: Maybe we need to add something to deal with the standalone declaration. 14:36:19 Henry: Bad idea. No one understands it, no one uses it correctly. 14:36:26 +??P1 14:36:39 Jim back 14:36:46 Norm: I expect Michael Sperberg-McQueen to file a comment about that, based on conversations we had in Prague. 14:36:56 Alex: It does answer the question from the author's perspective. 14:37:22 Norm: It's interesting, could we "recommend" only using documents that have standalone=yes. 14:37:40 Henry: On the web, we could. I don't know if I want to. 14:39:31 Henry: The other side of that is the XML promise, that all XML processors can process all well-formed documents. Surely if we recommend standalone=yes, browsers should reject documents that assert standalone=no 14:39:32 Remember the so-called XML Promise "All XML processors can process all well-formed XML documents" 14:39:52 Norm: So where are we? 14:41:09 Alex: It's a real issue because external subsets become a bottleneck. 14:41:32 ...We should have good, solid answers to questions about how you deal with the questions. 14:42:01 ...And if I fall back from the recommended profile then I lose XInclude which I don't want to lose. 14:42:08 ...I wonder why we don't have one inbetween? 14:42:14 Henry: Basically because we thought five was too many. 14:42:42 coming up to speed with profiles... 14:42:55 Norm: I'm inclined to give this a week. 14:43:05 Henry: Can I address a completely different issue wrt the spec? 14:43:35 ...To call people's attention to the fact that I restructured things a bit to try to make the relationships clearer. 14:43:48 ...This was in direct response to a comment from Liam just as we were going out the door. 14:44:06 ...If anyone has any problems or spots any errors, it would be helpful to hear about that. 14:44:16 Norm: I like the fact they're links now. 14:44:26 Topic: Any other business? 14:44:32 None heard. 14:44:39 Adjourned. 14:44:40 -PGrosso 14:44:42 -ht 14:44:42 -Norm 14:44:42 -Vojtech 14:44:44 -??P1 14:44:45 -[IPcaller] 14:44:45 bye 14:44:46 XML_PMWG()10:00AM has ended 14:44:48 Attendees were Norm, PGrosso, ht, jfuller, Vojtech, [IPcaller] 14:44:48 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 14:44:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:44:51 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/04/14-xproc-minutes.html Norm 14:46:19 PGrosso has left #xproc 16:47:29 Zakim has left #xproc 16:50:01 ht has joined #xproc 16:58:23 ndw has joined #xproc