16:01:28 RRSAgent has joined #xproc 16:01:28 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/02/07-xproc-irc 16:01:36 zakim, please call ht-781 16:01:37 ok, ht; the call is being made 16:01:37 +Norm 16:01:39 +Ht 16:02:03 Meeting: XML Processing Model WG 16:02:03 Date: 7 February 2008 16:02:03 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/07/07-agenda 16:02:03 Meeting: 101 16:02:03 Chair: Norm 16:02:04 Scribe: Norm 16:02:06 ScribeNick: Norm 16:02:18 +??P0 16:02:22 Zakim, ? is me 16:02:22 +ruilopes; got it 16:02:42 richard has joined #xproc 16:02:58 alexmilowski has joined #xproc 16:03:13 + +44.131.467.aaaa 16:03:23 AndrewF has joined #xproc 16:03:30 Regrets: Alessandro, Mohamed 16:03:33 hmm, i suppose that's me, but it's not the right number 16:03:36 zakim, ? is mo 16:03:36 sorry, richard, I do not recognize a party named '?' 16:03:41 zakim, + is me 16:03:41 +richard; got it 16:03:45 +alexmilowski 16:03:58 Zakim, who's on the phone? 16:03:58 On the phone I see PGrosso, Norm, Ht, ruilopes, richard, alexmilowski 16:04:09 Present: Paul, Norm, Henry, Rui, Richard, Alex 16:04:16 +??P9 16:04:20 zakim, ? is Andrew 16:04:21 +Andrew; got it 16:04:27 Present: Paul, Norm, Henry, Rui, Richard, Alex, Andrew 16:05:35 Topic: Accept this agenda? 16:05:35 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/02/07-agenda 16:05:40 Accepted. 16:05:46 Topic: Accept minutes from the previous meeting? 16:05:46 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/01/31-minutes 16:05:57 Accepted. 16:06:06 Topic: Next meeting: telcon 14 February 2008? 16:06:16 No regrets given 16:06:29 Topic: Last call comments 16:06:30 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments.html 16:06:30 Topic: Last call comments 16:06:30 -> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2007/09/lastcall/comments.html 16:06:45 Topic: Excluding prefixes on p:inline 16:07:03 Norm attempts to summarize. 16:07:44 Norm: Do we want to make it possible to exclude prefixes? 16:09:40 Henry: What's wrong with telling processors they should construct documents as if serializing the document, removing all inherited namespace bindings from the root, and reparsing? 16:09:55 ...That is, remove everything that's inherited. 16:10:20 ...In the 0.1 percent case, you'd have to bind a namespace several times because you were using it in several inlines. 16:10:35 Norm: That seems way more confusing than just adding the attribute. 16:11:25 Alex: Considering we have to produce a document from p:inline, you have to do a little bit of work. So having to do a little more work doesn't seem that bad. 16:11:59 Henry: If you've got an infoset, you're going to have to walk through and fix all the nodes. 16:12:10 Alex: I don't think so. 16:12:36 Henry: In order to prevent serialization from doing the wrong thing further down the line, you're going to have to look at all the namespace information bindings. 16:13:13 Some discussion of how complicated this really is. 16:14:25 http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#lre-namespaces 16:14:54 Henry: What that says is you've got to walk the tree and prune the nodes. 16:14:59 s/nodes/namespace nodes/ 16:16:19 Richard: XSLT's mechanism is slightly more complicated than the excluded prefixes; the xsl: prefix is excluded and then there's an alias that lets you put it back in. 16:16:28 Norm: Bah. 16:17:23 Alex: I wonder if there's a simple thing that we have a problem with: the document element is going to inherit all the in-scope namespaces. The simple question is, do we break that relationship? 16:17:57 Henry: The argument that says inline is very-very parallel to literal result elements in XSLT suggests we should make it very parallel. 16:18:08 +1 to that. 16:18:21 ...We exclude the pipeline namespace, we provide exclude-result-prefixes, and we add the aliasing. 16:18:48 ...If we think it's parallel to XSLT LREs, we should change things to make it parallel. 16:18:53 HST didn't say 'add the aliasing', but might be persuaded. . . 16:20:06 Henry: Because we can stand in a better place, I'm going to try to do it the following way: 16:20:24 ...what the ... nevermind 16:21:00 ...what I was going to say was that we exclude them from this element where they're inherited. But that's too hard and complicated. 16:21:12 ACTION: Henry to draft a spec change for providing exclude-result-prefixes on p:inline. 16:21:50 Richard: We don't need a dual to the xsl:exclude-result-prefixes attribute, and you only put them on a p:inline element, not on some higher element. 16:22:03 Henry: I guess you should be able to put it on the p:pipeline or p:declare-step? 16:22:13 Richard: No. Remember that the 90% case is you don't do this at all. 16:23:20 MoZ has joined #xproc 16:23:32 Henry: Proposition #1, there's a dont-exclude-pipeline-namespaces attribute which is false by default. Or there's an exclude-pipeline-namespaces attribute which is true by default. 16:23:40 Richard: Is it used for anything else in XSLT? 16:23:49 Henry asserts its not 16:24:11 Richard reads something from the XSLT spec about security and namespace aliasing. 16:27:12 Scribe distracted for a moment 16:27:32 Richard proposes using another step if you really need to have the pipeline namespace. 16:28:52 Topic: p:label-elements proposal from Alex 16:29:02 -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Feb/0017.html 16:30:19 Alex summarizes the proposal, including an addition to control replacement 16:31:58 Henry: Remind me, did we reach closure on a variable versus a function? 16:32:08 Alex: I think those of us who wanted this change wanted the variable. 16:32:50 Alex: My rationale is that some APIs make it easier to set a variable than a function. 16:33:41 Henry: As we've repeatedly commented, implementations don't have to use XPath at all in the defaulted case. 16:34:02 ...It's easy to optimize this if you want to. 16:34:23 Alex: One tweak is to say that the label attribute is optional 16:37:13 Some discussion of function vs. variable. 16:37:58 Alex: Inside a step, it seems like you need an API that you might not otherwise need inside the step. Things like viewport can be very different. The API for steps might be simpler, cleaner. 16:38:44 Alex: Writing things in steps seems different than writing things in the core language. 16:39:25 Shall we adopt Alex's proposal? 16:39:36 Accepted. 16:40:03 Alex: With a replace option? 16:40:08 Norm: I think so, any objections? 16:40:10 None heard. 16:40:30 Topic: #108. Serialization parameters as parameter input ports 16:41:29 Norm: I think this is a desire to compute serializatin parameters and pass them in dynamically. Maybe useful, but not a V1 feature in my mind. 16:43:02 Henry: Besides, there's a workaround. 16:43:19 ...You can write the document and the compute the options from that document. 16:43:46 Proposal: No change to support this use case in V1. 16:43:54 Accepted. 16:44:20 ACTION: Alex to reply to the submitter. 16:44:38 Topic: 110. Add dates to schema docs 16:45:04 Norm: I don't know why I put this on the agenda, it's editorial. Let's just do it. 16:45:12 Accepted. 16:45:32 Topic: #109. Response headers is in p:http-request 16:46:05 Alex: I think we should drop the ommission of content-* headers. 16:46:55 ...I don't think I want to go into parsing the headers because the header parsing is dependent on the header, they don't all take parameters. 16:48:22 Alex: I think its overkill even if it is generally true. And I don't think you'd gain anything. 16:48:43 ..in the case of charset, the parameter has already been used to decode the content. 16:48:54 +Murray_Maloney 16:50:11 ACTION: Alex to consider any clarifications that might need to be made to p:http-request. 16:50:42 At the very least, go ahead and remove the restriction on content-* headers. 16:51:04 Topic #111. Additions to implementation defined section 16:51:56 Norm: I suggest that we whatever XPath 2.0 does wrt Unicode versions. 16:52:05 ACTION: Norm to add the Unicode version text to the spec 16:52:18 Topic: 112. Propose a warning mechanism. 16:52:50 Norm: I don't think we need to say anything about warnings, but I'm prepared to be persuaded. 16:53:31 Alex: Programs can generate warnings if they want. 16:53:57 Proposed: We'll say nothing in the spec about this. 16:53:59 Accepted. 16:54:22 Topic: #113. Nitpicking p:insert and p:add-attribute 16:55:04 Norm is inclined to agree with the commenter 16:56:45 Richard: What does add-attribute do if the attribute is already present 16:56:49 Norm: We don't say. That we need to fix. 16:57:07 Norm: Let's take these one at a time. 16:57:54 Norm: Are we going to rename add-attribute to insert-attribute? 16:58:00 Alex: I'm not sure insert is the right word 16:58:13 Norm: I don't hear any support. 16:59:14 Norm: So I'm inclined to leave insert the way it is; we might relax the restrictions in the future. 16:59:40 Richard: And if the document has a PI, then that gets inserted, so we can't rename it insert-element. 16:59:48 Alex: And we can have before and after, so it isn't a child. 17:00:07 Proposal: do nothing. 17:00:31 ACTION: Alex to fix add-attribute wrt existing attributes 17:00:41 ACTION: Alex to fix insert so that it doesn't always imply child. 17:01:08 Accepted. 17:01:15 Topic: Any other business? 17:01:22 None. 17:01:28 -Ht 17:01:30 Adjourned. 17:01:32 -alexmilowski 17:01:33 -Murray_Maloney 17:01:33 -Andrew 17:01:34 -PGrosso 17:01:35 -Norm 17:01:36 -richard 17:01:37 -ruilopes 17:01:38 XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended 17:01:40 Attendees were PGrosso, Norm, Ht, ruilopes, +44.131.467.aaaa, richard, alexmilowski, Andrew, Murray_Maloney 17:01:43 RRSAgent, set logs world-visible 17:01:47 RRSAgent, draft minutes 17:01:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/02/07-xproc-minutes.html Norm 17:03:01 PGrosso has left #xproc 18:23:37 Zakim has left #xproc