14:43:11 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 14:43:11 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-xproc-irc 14:43:24 Zakim, this will be XML Proc 14:43:24 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, ht 14:43:31 Zakim, this will be XProc 14:43:31 ok, ht; I see XML_PMWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 17 minutes 14:43:36 Norm has joined #xproc 14:43:45 meeting: XML Processing Model WG telcon 14:43:58 Chair: Henry S. Thompson (pro tem) 14:44:07 Scribe: Henry S. Thompson 14:44:12 ScribeNick: ht 14:45:59 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/08/16-agenda.html 14:46:32 Agenda+ Administrivia 14:46:47 Agenda+ Namespace binding 14:47:02 Agenda+ Comments on August 10 editors' draft 14:47:20 Agenda+ Discussion of p:pack 14:55:27 ruilopes has joined #xproc 14:56:03 PGrosso has joined #xproc 14:58:56 zakim, what's the code? 14:58:56 the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Norm 14:59:09 Jeni has joined #xproc 14:59:16 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has now started 14:59:22 Zakim, please call JeniTennison 14:59:22 I am sorry, Jeni; I do not know a number for JeniTennison 14:59:23 + +1.781.442.aaaa 14:59:35 Jeni, it's just Jeni 14:59:45 Welcome! 14:59:46 +[ArborText] 14:59:55 Zakim, please call Jeni 14:59:55 ok, Jeni; the call is being made 14:59:57 +Jeni 14:59:59 Thanks Henry 15:02:16 zakim, who's on the phone? 15:02:16 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Jeni 15:02:39 zakim, please call ht-781 15:02:39 ok, ht; the call is being made 15:02:40 +Ht 15:03:30 richard has joined #xproc 15:04:11 +??P0 15:04:13 zakim, ? is me 15:04:13 +richard; got it 15:04:19 Andrew has joined #xproc 15:04:48 +??P1 15:04:58 +??P4 15:05:07 Zakim, ??P1 is me 15:05:07 +ruilopes; got it 15:05:16 Regrets: Allesandro and Mohamed 15:05:18 zakim, ??P4 is me 15:05:18 +Andrew; got it 15:05:24 zakim, who's on the call? 15:05:24 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Jeni, Ht, richard, ruilopes, Andrew 15:06:26 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 15:07:07 + +1.415.404.aabb 15:07:26 zakim, next agendum 15:07:26 agendum 1. "Administrivia" taken up [from ht] 15:07:33 http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/08/09-minutes.html 15:08:12 RESOLVED: Minutes of 9 August approved as published 15:08:38 Next meeting: 23 August 15:08:44 No regrets notified as yet 15:09:10 Agenda slightly reordered to put namespace binding first 15:09:18 Zakim, next agendum 15:09:18 agendum 2. "Namespace binding" taken up [from ht] 15:09:30 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Aug/0075.html 15:10:29 HST: AM and JT have maybe reached agreement on this issue 15:10:51 AM: Option values are a combination of a string and a set of namespace bindings 15:11:00 q+ to ask if everyone is really happy with the idea that option *values* carry namespace bindings with them 15:11:02 ... this is for QName [and XPath] interpretation 15:11:36 ... Where do these nsb come from? 15:11:51 ... By default, from the option element itself 15:12:21 ... but you can use a 'namespaces' attribute on p:option to identify a node whose bindings should be used 15:13:02 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Aug/0130.html 15:13:24 AM: Consider selecting a node from a document to get an option value 15:13:27 I don't see any examples that use the new 'namespaces' attribute. Am I blind? 15:13:37 ... you want to take the nearest ancestor-or-self to get nsb 15:14:25 s/selecting a node/constructing a string/ 15:15:08 AM: The tricky case is when you use an option value to set an option value 15:15:25 ... In that case you pass the nsb along with 15:15:33 q+ to check something 15:16:22 AM: The remaining case which my proposal doesn't cover is when you construct a value which e.g. concats another option value 15:16:59 JT: I suggest we add a special-purpose step which handles this case 15:17:14 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2007Aug/0135.html 15:18:17 AM: This approach requires the author to do some extra work 15:18:34 NW: Could we see an example which requires this, and how it would work 15:19:00 JT: Consider concat('foo:',$delete) 15:20:12 concat($delete, '/html:p') 15:20:36 e.g. the option value is an element QName that is used in a constructed XPath 15:22:54 JT: So the p:to-xml step can be used to unpack an option into an element with the nsb from it and value its value 15:23:14 ... and then you can do anything you need to 15:24:08 ... with that document, and then use the result to set an option 15:24:38 RT: We couldn't write the p:to-xml step currently 15:24:53 ... because the connection from the string to the nsb is not available e.g. to XSLT 15:24:55 JT: Yes 15:25:35 AM: Have we really solved the problem of supporting general XPath construction? 15:25:59 ... I don't think so, because of possible NS conflicts 15:26:34 NW: No way to make it work in principle 15:27:15 RT: Yes there is -- there's always an XPath that does the right thing, if you know all the QNames anywhere in the string, and all the prefix bindings 15:27:50 ... this would work even if there were two a: prefixed names with different bindings 15:28:17 HST: I wonder if Alex isn't pointing us in the right direction 15:28:36 Those are the major cases, but they're not the only cases. 15:29:03 HST: We should just support XPath construction and bare QNames 15:31:01 HST: What about the following: 15:32:35 JT: As proposed, the namespaces attribute provides the _only_ bindings, so that wouldn't work 15:32:54 HST: But couldn't we spec. it to merge in a defined way 15:33:14 AM: Yes, but what about conflicts 15:33:44 HST: I'm happy for that case to cause an error 15:34:40 RT: What about a component for generating a QName with a guaranteed-unique prefix bound to a specified namespace, so there couldn't be a complex 15:35:07 AM: I'm inclined towards HST's proposal 15:35:47 NW: Why not combine in [scribe missed] 15:36:06 RT: Why not allow the namespaces attribute to specify a set of namespaces 15:36:28 JT: Then we should go with my original proposal to have a element 15:36:36 q? 15:36:39 q- ht 15:36:41 q- Norm 15:37:31 NW: It seems to me that the p:namespaces element proposal involves a bit less magic. . . 15:37:51 I had been queued to ask if everyone was happy with $option values carrying namespaces, but since I don't see any alternative...I'm going to let it go. 15:38:58 (in my proposal I mentioned we could allow a node set and just take the first one) 15:39:05 (as an option) 15:40:06 zakim, who's on the call? 15:40:06 On the phone I see Norm, PGrosso, Jeni, Ht, richard, ruilopes, Andrew, alexmilowski 15:40:41 HST: [summarizes the dimension of variation and asks for a round-robin] 15:40:59 1: Minimum: option values carry NS bindings with them 15:41:23 2: You can override the bindings with one (or more?) XPaths to pick up a node 15:41:46 3: Some kind of merger, with error or priority 15:42:01 4: Allow many sources of bindings 15:43:27 AM: Does (1) get its bindings from the context of the XPath 15:43:47 NW: (2) and above include p:to-xml 15:44:35 NW: (4) -- others have too much explanatory overhead 15:44:42 PG: Concur 15:45:03 Jeni: Could live with anything above (1), prefer (4) as per NW 15:45:47 HST: I prefer (3) because it covers the 99% case w/o having to use the new step, could live (4) 15:46:15 RT: Completely uncertain, not sure I understand implications of (4), Abstain 15:46:23 RL: Concur 15:46:36 Ax: Abstain 15:46:46 s/Ax/AF/ 15:46:58 AM: (3), could perhaps live with (4) 15:47:37 NW: I suggest the editor try to write up (4) and we see what it looks like 15:48:05 ACTION: Editor to write up (4) and we see what it looks like 15:48:30 NW: I think we can go to Last Call if we get agreement on that 15:54:56 HST: I'm still in the middle of a careful readthrough, and so far one point has arisen which could be considered as a real issue 15:55:41 ... and I'm confident we'll deal with it 15:55:59 NW, HST: [discussion about names on p:when etc. issue] 15:56:20 zakim, next agendum 15:56:20 agendum 3. "Comments on August 10 editors' draft" taken up [from ht] 15:56:42 [see above] 15:57:00 NW: What about 'yes|no' vs. 'true|false' 15:57:30 JT: Given that people may use XPaths to generate values, we should go for 'true|false' 15:58:08 NW: I'm just not sure how people who expect 'yes|no' will feel 15:58:22 HST: I prefer just 'true|false' (and maybe 0|1) 15:58:54 -Ht 15:58:55 -Norm 15:58:56 -richard 15:58:58 -ruilopes 15:58:59 -PGrosso 15:59:01 -alexmilowski 15:59:02 -Andrew 15:59:05 -Jeni 15:59:06 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 15:59:07 Attendees were +1.781.442.aaaa, PGrosso, Jeni, Norm, Ht, richard, ruilopes, Andrew, +1.415.404.aabb, alexmilowski 15:59:12 PGrosso has left #xproc 15:59:17 NW: Anyone opposed to restricting all the boolean-type things in the spec to 'true|false'? 15:59:38 RESOLVED: To restrict all the boolean-type things in the spec to 'true|false'. 15:59:50 RRSAgent, make logs world-visible. 15:59:59 RRSAgent, make logs world-visible 16:00:12 RRSAgent, draft minutes 16:00:12 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/08/16-xproc-minutes.html ht 16:34:48 Norm has joined #xproc