14:01:27 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 14:01:27 logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-xproc-irc 14:01:30 Zakim has joined #xproc 14:01:32 zakim, this is xproc 14:01:32 ok, Norm; that matches XML_PMWG()10:00AM 14:02:05 zakim, passcode? 14:02:05 the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Norm 14:02:15 +Norm 14:02:20 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 14:02:20 Date: 20 October 2011 14:02:20 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/10/20-agenda 14:02:20 Meeting: 200 14:02:20 Chair: Norm 14:02:21 Scribe: Norm 14:02:23 ScribeNick: Norm 14:02:54 zakim, who's here? 14:02:54 On the phone I see Vojtech, PGrosso, Norm 14:02:55 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Norm, PGrosso, Vojtech, Liam, ht, caribou 14:03:00 +??P15 14:03:58 jimfuller has joined #xproc 14:04:13 lurking on irc, regrets on telcon with client at the moment 14:04:18 (last minute telcon that is!) 14:04:47 Present: Norm, Vojtech, Henry, Paul 14:04:52 Regrets: Mohamed, Jim 14:04:56 Topic: Accept this agenda? 14:04:56 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/10/20-agenda 14:05:01 Accepted. 14:05:05 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 14:05:05 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2011/10/13-minutes 14:05:09 Accepted. 14:05:14 Topic: Next meeting: telcon, 32 October 2011 in Santa Clara 14:05:24 s/32/31/ 14:05:53 Accepted. Skipping the telcon next week, meeting 31 Oct/1 Nov in Santa Clara 14:06:04 Topic: XML processor profiles 14:06:47 Henry: Some of the comments had already been addressed. Liam was commenting on a preceding draft. 14:06:59 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 14:08:22 Norm: I was hoping to make some progress on the remaining comments, but didn't get the feedback I requested. 14:08:30 ...I think this has to be our focus for the f2f. 14:08:58 +Alex_Milows 14:09:11 Present: Norm, Vojtech, Henry, Paul, Alex 14:09:12 Norm, if we can grab some time next week, I think we can punch/summarise through most of Michael's comments in about an hour, I hvae done my first pass and now just need a bit of your time 14:09:24 then we can summarise to WG 14:10:12 Norm: What about the prose I wrote? 14:10:18 Henry: It seems long, but I'm happy to include it. 14:11:49 Norm: I propose if no one objects, we include it for the next draft. I think it'll help address at least a couple of comments that we have open. 14:11:52 No one objects. 14:11:54 +1 14:12:01 Norm: I'll resolve the remaining editorial issues with Paul and the pass it along. 14:13:48 +JimFuller 14:15:10 Topic: XProc issues 14:15:18 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/xproc-candidate-issues/ 14:15:54 Norm: Let's look at 009 as a place to start. 14:18:11 s/009/013/ 14:19:30 Alex: If it's sent back as application/octet-stream, then there's no information lost because there's no charset. 14:22:00 Norm: So maybe my first suggestion about charset param is not necessary. 14:22:10 Jim: What if you want to override the charset? 14:22:34 Norm: That seems a little odd to me. 14:23:23 Vojtech: We now have c:body and c:data, I think that it would make sense if they were interchangable. The c:data has a charset attribute. 14:24:00 ...Maybe it would be better if we just had c:data or c:body, but if we have to have both, they should be interchangable. 14:24:25 Norm: We got here by adding c:data late in the process and not really taking the time to work out the consequences. 14:24:44 Norm: On the basis that c:data has a charset attribute, I think c:body should as well. 14:25:15 Alex: I'm rereading the section on converting entity bodies, which I know we've talked about in the past. 14:26:03 ...It feels like it could be tightened. It leaves open a lot of interpretation; especially if you get back something from http-request. 14:27:05 Norm: It also handles application/sparql and application/json. 14:27:24 Alex: We said charset for text/ types, maybe we should have said it for non-text/ types as well. 14:27:47 Norm: Ok that might be worth reviewing. 14:28:10 Alex: We could at least say non-normatively that the presence of a charset was a good way to make assumptions about the characters. 14:29:07 Norm: Let's move this up a level; is there anyone who disagrees with Vojtech's assertion that c:body and c:data should be interchangeable. 14:29:29 Vojtech: There are at least two steps, p:xquery and p:unescape markup that make explicit statements about c:data, we'd have to allow c:body there as well. 14:29:51 Norm: My inclination would be to do just that, to say everywhere that we use c:data that c:body is allowed and vice-versa. 14:30:02 ACTION: Norm to write a proposal to do that. 14:30:41 Vojtech: It has implications in how p:data and p:http-request are handled as well. 14:33:50 Norm describes the shortcomings of p:unescape-markup as outlined in the message 14:33:57 Norm: I think we should default the charset. 14:34:02 Alex: Why can't we auto-detect? 14:34:11 Norm: That turns out to be really, really hard. 14:35:10 Alex: The flip side of that is, that we're guessing too. Forcing them to guess is good. 14:36:35 Norm: Wait one sec. I did these in the wrong order. Consider my point 3 first. If p:unescape-markup gets a c:body or c:data elment that specifies the encoding, then it should use that encoding without causing errors. 14:36:38 General agreement. 14:38:20 Norm: describes the problem of a missing encoding in that case. 14:38:42 Vojtech: I think that's a problem in the step that *produced* the data. Fix it in the http-request. 14:38:54 ...Make sure you have what you expected after you get the data. 14:39:08 Alex: If you look at the specification of this step. 14:39:34 ...It doesn't say anything about the element that it expects to receive. Now we're saying if it receives a c:body it can do something with that. 14:39:53 ...I wonder if it's better to just have an option that says you should look at this thing and if it has certain elements or attributes, use them. 14:40:09 ...For example, a content-type attribute or a charset attribute. Then you can have it as whatever you want. 14:40:14 Vojtech: I proposed the same thing in my response. 14:40:26 ...We can just have an optional option to enable or disable this behavior. 14:41:24 Norm: Ok. I don't recall that part of the discussion. Adding an option to specify that the encoding and/or content type are in attributes on the incoming element makes sense to me. 14:42:31 Norm: In summary: We don't want unescape-markup to default the charset, you have to get that right yourself, and we don't want c:data or c:body treated specially, we want an optional option to specify that content-type or encoding or charset are encoded in attributes on the root element. 14:42:52 Alex: I wonder if it makes sense to categorize the different situations and then see what we've got. 14:43:16 ...One of the cases that we don't cover well is that I have a random bit of markup with a content-type attribute. I have to write a pipeline to pick that out and get it into options. 14:43:34 ...Another is the the case Norm has, where you get different responses from the web. 14:43:47 ...It might be nice to outline solutions for the different cases and then see where we are. 14:44:17 ACTION: Alex to outline the various possibilities for input to p:unescape-markup. 14:45:32 Vojtech: What about 014? 14:45:49 Topic: Issue 014, can steps have foward-references? 14:45:57 Vojtech: I think it's the case, but it's not clear from the spec. 14:48:29 Norm: I think it is the case however, if you read our import story. 14:49:50 General consensus that it's a case of lazy evaluation. 14:50:16 Norm: There's a related question about lazy evaluation. 14:50:59 ...Can you avoid imports if you don't need them? 14:51:08 Vojtech: No, because you have to report static errors. 14:51:16 Norm: So you have to do it half lazily. 14:51:58 Henry: Yeah, that is sort of unfortunate, but I think that's the way it is. 14:53:59 Henry: It is or is not a static error to write a pipeline that invokes a step that isn't defined. 14:54:36 Vojtech: Forwards-compatible mode applies here. 14:54:46 s/applies here/is relevant here. 14:55:46 Norm: In short: we do allow forward references and we do check for static errors. 14:55:56 Topic: Any other business? 14:56:20 None heard. 14:56:27 Adjourned. 14:56:30 -PGrosso 14:56:31 -JimFuller 14:56:31 -Vojtech 14:56:32 -Alex_Milows 14:56:32 -Norm 14:56:36 -ht 14:56:38 XML_PMWG()10:00AM has ended 14:56:38 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 14:56:39 Attendees were Vojtech, PGrosso, Norm, ht, Alex_Milows, JimFuller 14:56:42 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:56:42 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/20-xproc-minutes.html Norm 14:56:45 alexmilowski has left #xproc 14:58:57 PGrosso has left #xproc 16:29:59 Zakim has left #xproc