17:59:39 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 17:59:39 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-xproc-irc 17:59:45 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 17:59:46 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 17:59:46 Date: 2 Mar 2016 17:59:46 Meeting: 289 17:59:47 Chair: Norm 17:59:47 Scribe: Norm 17:59:48 ScribeNick: Norm 17:59:50 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2016/03/02-agenda 18:00:58 Present: Norm, Alex, Henry, Jim 18:01:15 Present: Norm, Alex, Henry, Jim, Murray 18:02:45 Topic: Accept this agenda? 18:02:45 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2016/03/02-agenda 18:02:56 Accepted. 18:03:10 How was oxford 18:03:11 ? 18:03:15 jfuller has joined #xproc 18:03:22 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 18:03:22 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2016/02/24-minutes 18:03:28 Ah, right, silly me 18:03:39 Accepted. 18:03:43 Topic: Next meeting, 16 Mar 2016 18:03:52 Norm Walsh, MI7 18:04:05 No regrets heard 18:04:06 Works for me -- I also am unavailable on 9 March 18:04:30 Topic: Moving away from an expression language 18:04:33 q+ to introduce what I've been doing, ask for help 18:05:30 Alex: What about data literals from last week? 18:05:49 Henry: I think we reached violent agreement; the situation wrt media types and literals is complicated and isn't going to be simple no matter what we do. 18:06:06 ... I think some of the discussion was confused but that's ok, we have enough on the record to proceed. 18:06:20 Alex: Good. 18:06:53 Discussion of expression language issues 18:10:08 the link Alex mentioned 18:10:08 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2016Feb/0022.html 18:10:26 Alex: The variables question is open and maybe it can be discussed somewhat separately. 18:10:50 Norm: But what about literals 18:10:58 Alex: If we make data literals easy, then you just do thta. 18:11:03 s/thta/that/ 18:11:16 ... That's a story we can explain and if it's sufficient then it greatly simplifies our language. 18:11:55 Norm: But then all we're left with is conditionals. 18:13:29 Some discussion of making the expression language pluggable. 18:13:59 Alex: That's what I was thinking about when I gave the quoted syntax at XML Prague. 18:14:10 ...Like make using $(...) or something like that. What goes on the inside can be different things. 18:14:38 I think this is an interesting direction .... 18:15:03 ...The immediate thing that follows is what do I do if I have different expression languages. 18:16:02 Norm: That's what I was saying earlier about the ability to declare the current expression language. 18:16:56 Alex: I think I'd prefer to have a way to specify the default expression language and provide another way to express a different one on a per-use basis. 18:17:07 ... Optionall, this one is "wonky CSV query language". 18:17:49 Murray: Two things: one is that you want information about the current processor. The trace output needs to say that the expression language has changed. 18:18:12 ... As soon as you allow this, you're going to have people who want to have conditionals composed from several languages. 18:19:09 Norm: Yeah, I'm willing to say "no". I think the 95% case is one expression language throughout. 18:19:36 Jim: We could have our own minimal expression language: true/false, boolean conditionals... 18:19:48 Alex: That's what I'd propose for Murray's case. 18:20:15 Norm: Yeah, that could work. 18:21:15 Alex: if you're just going to check the output of a step, then you could say that empty is false and anything else is true. 18:21:24 ... That covers a whole bunch of cases without introducing an expression language. 18:21:37 Murray: What if the port doesn't exist? Does it spring into existence? 18:21:47 Alex: That's a good question. Is it an error is it just false. 18:22:36 Jim: How draconian or Postelian do we want to be. 18:22:40 Norm: Yeah, less draconion. 18:23:28 Jim proposes declared options; Alex muses about interoperability if we have too many of those. 18:24:40 Henry: I wonder if tumblers are useful enough ... nah ... I just note that paths work for JSON. 18:25:24 ... It feels to me like 90% of my expressions are paths plus equality and inequality. 18:26:00 Alex: Products like MarkLogic that can do XPath expressions over JSON are really powerful. 18:26:36 Norm: So should we take as a direction exploring making the expression language pluggable. 18:26:41 General agreement. No objections. Accepted. 18:27:01 Topic: Removing '@'? 18:27:16 https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2016Feb/0023.html 18:27:46 Alex walks us through this thread. 18:31:17 Norm: We could make the separator "," or ";" required and then we wouldn't need an explicit placeholder. 18:31:56 Alex: We need a syntax, but there's lots of room for innovation. 18:32:20 ... Whatever we choose, we can use it in other places. 18:32:57 ... Then we don't need '@', it's just port variables. If it's on the RHS of ">>" we're assigning to it; if it's inside a step chain it's an input. 18:33:02 ... It's up to the processor to figure that out. 18:33:30 Norm: I'm sold on trying to explore this. I never liked $1 and @1. 18:33:58 Alex: You just have to declare them or you get a default. 18:34:15 Jim: I like this approach too. I observe that the underscore could just be "[]". 18:34:18 Alex: Yes, that's good. 18:34:47 ... The only time this is a problem is if you have a generator that has no inputs and produces output. They're common enough that we want to support them. 18:35:19 Norm: This sounds like the direction we want to explore. 18:35:49 Alex: I'd like to explore the idea of using this compact syntax in lots of places and see what it does. 18:36:10 ACTION: Alex to make a proposal for the syntax document with this grammar. 18:38:36 Topic: Any other business 18:38:56 https://github.com/xproc/notes/tree/master/design 18:39:46 Henry explains what's in this space. 18:39:54 Henry: I've been working on an example that may or may not be useful to anyone else. 18:40:06 ... I'm trying to work my way through an understanding of what we're calling the API syntax. 18:40:24 ... I'm not ready to go very far through this yet. But if you follow the link in the README. 18:41:31 ... This works in XProc 1. I'd like to understand what an XProc not-XML version of the pipeline would look like. 18:42:24 great stuff Henry - give me an action Norm 18:42:52 ACTION: Jim to attempt to cast this task in the current compact syntax. 18:44:40 Norm: Very cool. Thank you, Henry. 18:45:19 my eyes hurt reading xproc v1 now .... 18:49:17 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:49:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-xproc-minutes.html Norm 18:49:38 rrsagent, set logs world-visible 18:49:43 rrsagent, draft minutes 18:49:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-xproc-minutes.html Norm 19:29:06 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 20:52:38 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 21:37:47 alexmilowski has joined #xproc