IRC log of xproc on 2008-10-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:58:44 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #xproc
- 14:58:44 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-xproc-irc
- 14:58:46 [Norm]
- Meeting: XML Processing Model WG
- 14:58:46 [Norm]
- Date: 2 Oct 2008
- 14:58:46 [Norm]
- Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/02-agenda
- 14:58:46 [Norm]
- Meeting: 127
- 14:58:48 [Norm]
- Chair: Norm
- 14:58:50 [Norm]
- Scribe: Norm
- 14:58:51 [Norm]
- ScribeNick: Norm
- 14:58:53 [Norm]
- Regrets: Henry, Mohamed, Michael
- 14:59:16 [Norm]
- Regrets are wrong
- 15:01:31 [PGrosso]
- Zakim, this is XML_P
- 15:01:31 [Zakim]
- ok, PGrosso; that matches XML_PMWG()11:00AM
- 15:01:36 [Norm]
- thanks, paul
- 15:01:42 [Norm]
- I'll be there in a few minutes. I have to take another short call, less than 10min. Amuse yourself by reading the open issues list in my absence :-)
- 15:01:50 [ruilopes]
- Zakim, ??P1 is me
- 15:01:50 [Zakim]
- +ruilopes; got it
- 15:01:55 [MoZ]
- Zakim, what is the code ?
- 15:01:55 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MoZ
- 15:02:55 [ht]
- zakim, please call ht-781
- 15:02:55 [Zakim]
- ok, ht; the call is being made
- 15:02:56 [Zakim]
- +Ht
- 15:03:42 [Zakim]
- +??P41
- 15:03:43 [ht]
- s/Regrets: Henry, Mohamed, Michael/
- 15:03:51 [ht]
- s/Regrets: Henry, Mohamed, Michael//
- 15:03:58 [ht]
- zakim, ? is Richard
- 15:03:58 [Zakim]
- +Richard; got it
- 15:04:06 [richard]
- richard has joined #xproc
- 15:04:14 [richard]
- zakim, ? is me
- 15:04:14 [Zakim]
- sorry, richard, I do not recognize a party named '?'
- 15:04:18 [richard]
- zakim, richard is me
- 15:04:18 [Zakim]
- +richard; got it
- 15:04:29 [ht]
- Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/09/25-minutes.html
- 15:04:43 [Norm]
- Norm has changed the topic to: XProc WG meets today, http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/02-agenda
- 15:04:47 [ht]
- Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2008/10/02-agenda.html
- 15:05:05 [ht]
- zakim, who is on the call?
- 15:05:06 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see ruilopes, PGrosso, Ht, richard
- 15:05:58 [AndrewF]
- AndrewF has joined #xproc
- 15:06:01 [Norm]
- ok. i'm peddling as fast as I can
- 15:06:20 [ht]
- Next meeting: 9 October, no regrets noted
- 15:06:36 [Zakim]
- +Andrew
- 15:06:56 [ht]
- Minutes accepted as posted
- 15:08:00 [ht]
- Topic: Namespace binding examples
- 15:08:00 [ht]
- http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/docs/langspec.html#opt-param-bindings
- 15:08:48 [ht]
- Mohamed, are you joining us?
- 15:08:51 [ht]
- MoZ?
- 15:09:04 [Zakim]
- + +1.646.378.aaaa
- 15:09:09 [Norm]
- Zakim, who's on the phone?
- 15:09:09 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see ruilopes, PGrosso, Ht, richard, Andrew, +1.646.378.aaaa
- 15:09:22 [Norm]
- Present: Rui, Paul, Henry, Richard, Andrew, Norm
- 15:09:25 [Norm]
- Zakim, aaaa is norm
- 15:09:25 [Zakim]
- +norm; got it
- 15:09:45 [MoZ]
- Zakim, what is the code ?
- 15:09:45 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 97762 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), MoZ
- 15:10:31 [Zakim]
- + +95247aabb
- 15:10:41 [MoZ]
- Zakim, aabb is MoZ
- 15:10:41 [Norm]
- Present: Rui, Paul, Henry, Richard, Andrew, Norm, Mohamed
- 15:10:44 [Zakim]
- +MoZ; got it
- 15:11:05 [Norm]
- -> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2008Sep/0024.html
- 15:12:04 [Norm]
- Henry: I read it again and while it was complex, that complexity stems from the complexity of the feature, I think.
- 15:12:14 [Norm]
- ...I was left feeling that I wish we didn't have to do this.
- 15:12:16 [Norm]
- ScribeNick: Norm
- 15:12:24 [Norm]
- Norm: But we do...
- 15:13:20 [Norm]
- Norm: if anyone has any specific suggestions, I'd be happy to try, but I've done all I can.
- 15:13:47 [Norm]
- Mohamed: I think the examples are fine; I think it could be simpler, but mostly I just don't want users to be confused.
- 15:14:44 [Norm]
- Norm: I think most users will never need this, and hopefully by the time they do, there will be nice tutorials somewhere.
- 15:15:09 [Norm]
- Norm: Proposal: we're done, the revised prose is fine.
- 15:15:12 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:15:35 [Norm]
- Topic: 008
- 15:16:05 [Norm]
- Norm: This was a comment RELAX NG step. Henry pushed a little bit about APIs. And I went off and took a closer look.
- 15:18:01 [Norm]
- Norm summarizes his email.
- 15:18:13 [Norm]
- Norm: Err, dtd-id-idref-errors should be dtd-id-idref-warnings
- 15:18:16 [Norm]
- Henry: Works for me.
- 15:18:34 [Norm]
- Proposal: Accept Norm's suggestions, close the issue.
- 15:18:43 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:18:58 [Norm]
- Topic: 032
- 15:19:57 [Norm]
- Norm summarizes the thread.
- 15:20:12 [Norm]
- Proposal is in: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-comments/2008Sep/0044.html
- 15:20:47 [Norm]
- Henry: I don't understand the phase thing, but I'm not going to argue about it.
- 15:21:03 [Norm]
- Proposal: Accept Norm's suggestions and close the issue.
- 15:21:13 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:22:35 [Norm]
- Topic: 033
- 15:23:46 [Norm]
- Norm: The proposal is to standardize SVRL as the output.
- 15:24:08 [Norm]
- Henry: I have no problem saying that implementations SHOULD use SVRL[reference] for this purpose.
- 15:25:23 [Norm]
- Henry: The substantive issue of another output port for positive reports probably does need a new port.
- 15:26:43 [Norm]
- Norm: We already have a secondary port, can't we just put postive reports there?
- 15:27:13 [Norm]
- Henry: So it's impl defined what goes on that port. The only thing that's for sure is that if assert-valid is true then errors will go there if there are errors.
- 15:28:10 [Norm]
- Proposal: All reports (error or otherwise) go on the report port. We'll say that the output SHOULD be in SVRL.
- 15:28:28 [Norm]
- Accepted.
- 15:28:53 [Norm]
- Topic: 034
- 15:30:17 [Norm]
- Norm: This amounts to a proposal for a secondary port on the validation steps on which the answer 'true' or 'false' appears depending on whether or not the validation was successful.
- 15:31:44 [Norm]
- Henry: I got a private reply from James.
- 15:32:26 [Norm]
- Henry: He agrees that try/catch can be used, but thinks it would be more consistent if the result was available directly.
- 15:33:15 [Norm]
- Henry: Part of the problem is that in my pipeline, I support the PSVI and I have an extension function that makes it trivial to get this answer.
- 15:33:37 [Norm]
- ...We could put the validity/validation attempted results on the document in an XProc namespace.
- 15:33:51 [Norm]
- Mohamed: Streaming is also a problem.
- 15:35:47 [Norm]
- Some discussion of encoding of PSVI items...
- 15:36:48 [Norm]
- Richard: It's possible that you might want to determine the validity w/o doing anything with the validated result.
- 15:37:55 [Norm]
- Richard: I think the argument you quoted about the output of the step reflects a different idea about what validation means. If you're just asking the question, then it is, but if you're expecting downstream steps to use the result, then it isn't.
- 15:38:34 [Norm]
- Norm: Neither answer seems compelling to me.
- 15:39:07 [Norm]
- Henry: What's someone going to do with this result? Presumably they're going to put a choose in and write to subpipelines anyway...
- 15:39:14 [Norm]
- Richard: Maybe not, maybe the answer is just true/false
- 15:39:41 [Norm]
- Norm: But that's not terribly useful by itself.
- 15:40:02 [Norm]
- Mohamed: I don't think it's worth having this answer. It would make streaming imposible, so try/catch wouldn't be too much of a burden.
- 15:40:18 [Norm]
- ...You just write your own wrapper pipeline to get the result.
- 15:40:34 [Norm]
- ...Even in the proposal, there's the idea that you might want the error, etc. So that should be done in a try/catch.
- 15:40:36 [Norm]
- Henry: Yeah, I agree.
- 15:40:58 [Norm]
- ...This just encourages too many different ways to write the same thing.
- 15:41:33 [Norm]
- Norm: We earlier set "can you do it yourself" as a criteria for new steps, that can apply here.
- 15:42:02 [Norm]
- Mohamed: Right. This would change all the validate steps which is too big a change from my perspective.
- 15:42:19 [Norm]
- Propsal: Reject this request, you can get the result yourself with existing features of XProc
- 15:42:34 [Norm]
- Accepted
- 15:42:44 [MoZ]
- s/Propsal/Proposal/
- 15:43:28 [Norm]
- Topic: Where are we?
- 15:43:44 [Norm]
- Norm: Basically finished! The XSL/Query comment needs more work, but there's nothing major in it.
- 15:44:05 [Norm]
- ... The question of XML encryption/decryption/c14n, etc. is something we'll discuss with the XML Security WG next week.
- 15:44:09 [PGrosso]
- PGrosso has joined #xproc
- 15:45:34 [Norm]
- Norm describes his feelings about security which amount to putting the new steps in a separate document.
- 15:45:45 [Norm]
- Henry: I've supported that approach already.
- 15:46:21 [Norm]
- Mohamed: I think I agree. My proposal a few months ago was to put it all in a parameter port and try to standardize with a clear proposal. It ends up being the same to have it a separate note or REC-track document.
- 15:47:06 [Norm]
- Mohamed: On C14N, we've already discussed this and said it was a user-defined option on serialization.
- 15:47:38 [Norm]
- Norm: Good point! Thank you, Mohamed.
- 15:47:54 [Norm]
- Topic: Test suite
- 15:50:25 [Norm]
- Norm outlines that we'll get to CR just after the f2f. But we need tests to get out.
- 15:50:31 [Norm]
- Mohamed: How will we split up the work?
- 15:50:42 [Norm]
- Norm: Submit tests and I'll contrive to get some reports about what the coverage is.
- 15:51:28 [Norm]
- Norm: If people submit tests, I'll write some reports on analytics.
- 15:51:33 [Norm]
- Mohamed: Ok, I'll write some tests.
- 15:52:06 [Norm]
- Henry: If I have an idle day, I'll look at what would be required to convert my private tests into our format.
- 15:52:51 [Norm]
- ACTION: Norm to update teh RELAX NG grammer for the test suite vocabulary
- 15:52:56 [Norm]
- Topic: Any other business?
- 15:53:02 [Norm]
- None heard.
- 15:53:05 [Norm]
- Adjourned.
- 15:53:09 [Zakim]
- -norm
- 15:53:11 [Zakim]
- -ruilopes
- 15:53:11 [Zakim]
- -richard
- 15:53:13 [Zakim]
- -MoZ
- 15:53:13 [Zakim]
- -Andrew
- 15:53:14 [Zakim]
- -Ht
- 15:53:14 [Zakim]
- -PGrosso
- 15:53:15 [Zakim]
- XML_PMWG()11:00AM has ended
- 15:53:16 [Zakim]
- Attendees were PGrosso, ruilopes, Ht, richard, Andrew, +1.646.378.aaaa, norm, +95247aabb, MoZ
- 15:53:17 [Norm]
- RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
- 15:53:21 [Norm]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 15:53:21 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/10/02-xproc-minutes.html Norm
- 15:53:24 [PGrosso]
- PGrosso has left #xproc
- 15:53:47 [MoZ]
- MoZ has joined #xproc
- 16:51:27 [Norm]
- Norm has joined #xproc
- 17:32:50 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #xproc