See also: IRC log
Date: 26 January 2012
<scribe> Meeting: 207
<scribe> Scribe: Norm
<scribe> ScribeNick: Norm
-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/01/26-agenda
Accepted.
-> http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/01/19-minutes.html
Accepted.
No regrets heard.
A-206-01: continued
A-206-02: continued
A-206-03: completed
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2012Jan/0041.html
Norm: Yay us.
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-xml-proc-profiles-20120124/
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to setup the last call comment list for new LCWD [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/26-xproc-minutes.html#action01]
Norm: We got pushback on the charter; one of the possible solutions is to put FPWD of 2.0 in the charter.
Carine: We got pushback because
the goals weren't defined clearly enough.
... I was also surprised to see that issue of Rec-track
documents as pushback. We've done that before for requirements
and use cases.
Some discussion of the clarity of our goals.
Norm: So, basically, if we want to do V.next, we'll need to have a workshop or some other event to gauge interest. And if we don't put V.next in the charter, we won't get chartered.
Carine: I think that's basically the case.
Norm: Liam suggests putting FPWD of 2.0 and the possibility of a workshop in the charter. Maybe we should do that.
Cornelia: And why wouldn't we do that, isn't that what we want to do?
Henry: Yes, but earlier conversations suggested that we weren't ready to do 2.0.
Alex: But we have community feedback for 2.0
Henry: Yes, I think Liam just needs help writing that: point to wiki, point to mailing list.
<scribe> ACTION: Norm to work with Liam to get a new charter proposal drafted along those lines. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/01/26-xproc-minutes.html#action02]
Norm: I sent a list of low-hanging fruit items.
-> http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-xml-proc-profiles-20120124/
Norm: And Vojtech observes that
it doesn't anything about non-XML.
... And I think maybe we could do something smallish about
that.
Vojtech: I was thining especially
about small stuff.
... Like if you could save binary data, with p:store.
... To make it more symetrical. We have p:load with p:document
and p:data but we have nothing to store binary data.
Norm: Yes, and an option on p:store seems pretty straightfoward.
Vojtech: What I did is just what
Norm did, I added an extension to p:store. But mine was a bit
more generic in the sense that both and XML and non-XML data
can flow through the pipeline. Whatever the p:store gets, it
saves it.
... I was thinking about p:document and p:data and their
relationship. At the moment I didn't want to change that much.
I changed p:data so that it can produce binary data that's not
base64 encoded.
... But I wonder if p:document, if you point it to binary data,
whether it should do the same thing. Or if p:data should return
XML.
-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-processing-model-wg/2012Jan/0041.html
Norm: We should consider a proposal to do some work in this area; being able to load XML, HTML, JSON, etc.
Jim: In the past, have we ever talked about p:document*s*?
Henry: Yes, the possibility of
having a set of documents flowing through the pipeline was
there in the Markup pipeline. We did discuss it briefly, a
while ago.
... But it's not low-hanging fruit. You have to talk about how
to generate names for these things; it really has to be a map
so that steps down the pipeline can extract documents from the
set.
Jim: But multiple p:document elements can be used. That might let you implement something like an ant fileset.
Vojtech: So like in ant, you could specify a base URI and some sort of mask, so you get a sequence of files.
Jim: it's a little awkward to work with sets of files and baking in at that level would remove the contortion from some pipelines.
Norm: That seems like it might be low hanging fruit; you could implement it yourself.
Jim: Yes, but it wouldn't bake in at the p:input level.
Norm: Yeah, I can see that.
... I'll add that to the low-hanging fruit.
Alex: With AVTs, I can imagine
that we might be able to do the same sort of thing with HTTP
URIs.
... So if you had a set of documents, you could iterate with
numerical positions, perhaps.
Vojtech: You can also imagine doing this on the p:load step.
Jim: I've got one other thing. I did an experiment with my implementation, I enabled "AVT-everywhere".
Norm: You mean you made "{" and "} expand everywhere all the time.
Vojtech: But what if you want to include an XSLT pipelien?
Jim: You can turn it on and off.
Norm: I don't understand how that works.
Jim: There are lots of details; I just made them up.
Alex: That sounds a little bit like an alternative pipeline syntax.
Norm: I'd like to see some examples.
Norm runs through his list
<jfuller> completely agree on xpath 2.0 going forwards
Vojtech: There's also the question of optional not-specified options.
<jfuller> https://github.com/jpcs/rbtree.xq
Discussion inevitably returns to parameters.
Cornelia: I think another area we should be looking at is mashup-technologies. Those should be using XProc.
<jfuller> be great Cornelia if you have any links to mashups tech
Norm: I'll summarize again the low-hanging fruit and then I'd like everyone to think about whether or not that list is complete.
None heard.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136 of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: Norm Inferring ScribeNick: Norm Found ScribeNick: Norm Present: Henry Norm Vojtech Jim Alex Cornelia Carine Regrets: Mohamed Agenda: http://www.w3.org/XML/XProc/2012/01/26-agenda Found Date: 26 Jan 2012 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/01/26-xproc-minutes.html People with action items: norm[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]