XML Processing Model WG

Meeting 149, 16 Jul 2009



Paul, Henry, Vojtech, Norm, Alex


Accept this agenda?

-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/16-agenda


Accept minutes from the previous meeting?

-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2009/07/02-minutes


Next meeting: telcon 23 July 2009

No regrets heard.

Implicit output ports on p:declare-step

Norm: We agreed to wait two weeks, I haven't seen any discussion. Any discussion now?

Proposed: Change the spec to state that the implicit output port binding does not apply to p:declare-step.


Add [c:]encoding to the output p:data

Norm: Also held over from two weeks ago.
... I haven't seen anything about this either, any discussion?

Proposed: Add the attribute.


Storing to a non-existing directory

Norm: What do we want to do in this case. For the record, Saxon at least, creates the path.

Vojtech: We don't create the path at the moment. We overwrite existing files, too.

Norm: I don't think I create the path either.

Alex: Why isn't this implementation defined?

Vojtech: If you can't create the path, then at the moment you can't create the directory.

Norm: As an implementor, I'm tempted to create the path, but I don't have any problem with making it implementation defined.
... Three choices: MUST NOT, MUST try, or implementation-defined.

Alex: I'm for implementation-defined.

Proposed: Make this explicitly implementation-defined.

Alex: Do we have an error code for this?

Norm: I think it would be err:XD0021.

Alex: Doesn't have permissions isn't the same as doesn't exist. So it might be handy.

Vojtech: There's also err:XC0050 in p:store which is specifically for the case where p:store couldn't store to that location.

Norm: Right.

Alex: So do we say when you should throw which?

Norm: I think we give implementors pretty blanket freedom to throw 21 whenever they want.

Any objections to the proposal to make it implementation-defined?

None heard. Accepted.

141: xsl:message output from p:xslt

Norm: I don't think we want to do anything here, but I thought I'd raise it.

Some discussion of how messages may or may not be like stderr on p:exec.

Henry: So he could run the transformation by exec and grab stderr?

Norm: I suppose that would work.

Proposed: Close with no action.


Default processing model progess?

Norm: Henry, any progress?

Henry: No, I've had other W3C priorities.

Norm: Ok. We'll leave it on the agenda.

Test suite progress?

Norm: It's important that we have a complete test suite if we want to get out of CR.

Vojtech: I made progress with serialization in my implementation, so I'll be writing new tests there soon.

Any other business?

Congratulations Vojtech on the release of your processor!

No other business heard.


Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/07/16 15:42:31 $