IRC log of ixml on 2023-01-10

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:55:05 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #ixml
14:55:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:55:15 [Steven]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:55:24 [Steven]
Meeting: ixml Group Teleconference
14:55:31 [Steven]
Date: 10 Jan 2023
14:55:40 [Steven]
Chair: Steven
14:55:53 [Steven]
Previous meeting:
14:56:15 [norm]
Scribe: norm
14:56:28 [Steven]
14:56:41 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:56:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
15:01:23 [norm]
Present: Steven, Norm, Bethan, Michael, John, Joel
15:02:56 [tovey-walsh]
tovey-walsh has joined #ixml
15:02:58 [norm]
Topic: Review of previous action items
15:03:03 [cmsmcq]
cmsmcq has joined #ixml
15:03:11 [norm]
rrsagent, set logs world readable
15:04:05 [norm]
ACTION (2022-06-21): Tom isn't here
15:04:05 [trackbot]
Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
15:04:22 [Steven]
trackbot, bye
15:04:22 [trackbot]
trackbot has left #ixml
15:04:25 [norm]
ACTION (2022-11-15): Completed by Joel.
15:04:39 [norm]
ACTION: Norm to put the information about Joel's implementation on the home page
15:04:49 [norm]
Norm ACTION (2022-11-15): Done.
15:05:31 [mjoel]
mjoel has joined #ixml
15:06:11 [cmsmcq]
15:06:12 [john]
15:07:40 [norm]
Norm will merge pull request
15:07:53 [norm]
ACTION: Michael to take another pass on the EBNF to BNF document
15:08:10 [norm]
Norm (2022-11-15): completed
15:08:23 [norm]
Norm (2022-12-13): completed
15:08:53 [norm]
Steven (2022-12-13): continued
15:09:03 [norm]
Steven (2022-12-13): continued
15:09:27 [norm]
Steven (2022-12-13): completed
15:10:25 [norm]
ACTION: Steven to expand the tests in PR 169.
15:11:01 [cmsmcq]
combining grammars:
15:11:16 [norm]
Steven (2022-12-13): PR 167, compelted. Steven agrees.
15:11:30 [norm]
Michael (2022-12-13): completed
15:11:48 [norm]
Norm (2022-12-13) partially completed
15:11:56 [norm]
Topic: Status reports
15:12:07 [norm]
Joel: I'd love some help on my implementation.
15:12:17 [norm]
Steven: How does it do against the test suite?
15:12:25 [norm]
Joel: It's just about ready to start running tests.
15:12:54 [norm]
John: When I was implementing my parser, I didn't find the parsing tricky. Threading your way back up to where you started was the hard part.
15:13:32 [norm]
Norm: I have some quite complicated data structures for managing the state.
15:13:43 [norm]
Steven: How about you Bethan?
15:13:56 [norm]
Bethan: My thesis is coming along nicely!
15:14:13 [norm]
Topic: Testing and test suites
15:14:28 [norm]
Norm: I've got PR 169 but Steven's already agreed to extend that.
15:14:58 [norm]
Norm: How about we commit #169 and you add more?
15:14:59 [Github] : Character set tests (including LC)
15:15:07 [norm]
Steven: That's ok by me.
15:15:44 [norm]
Micheal: The inventory of characters in any class (and possibly known classes) may vary from version to version of Unicode. Strictly speaking, we ought to label the tests with the versions of Unicode that they pass.
15:16:25 [norm]
ACTION: Micheal to work out the metadata for identifying the Unicode version(s) associated with a test.
15:18:04 [norm]
Some discussion of what the parameters of the tests are.
15:18:16 [norm]
Steven: I want to have one character from each class and each block.
15:18:25 [norm]
Micheal: That's incomplete unless you identify the Unicode version.
15:18:54 [norm]
Joel: Is it the case that a test we write today would become invalid?
15:19:26 [norm]
Michael: If anyone can show me a commitment to that kind of stability on the Unicode site, I'll believe they intend that. But they've got it wrong in the past!
15:19:43 [norm]
Norm: I don't see any problem with having the metadata.
15:19:58 [norm]
Micheal: When any spec refers to another spec, the question arises of what version is referenced.
15:20:02 [mjoel]
15:20:25 [norm]
Michael: I think our current state is that the version of Unicode is implementation defined, but we don't say that.
15:20:46 [Steven]
15:21:14 [norm]
Some discussion of the stability policy linked above.
15:23:23 [mjoel]
Java 11 looks like it uses Unicode 10.0
15:23:32 [norm]
John: Can I suggest in two months time we try to get to a position where we can publish test reports.
15:24:12 [norm]
Michael: The test suite schema also defines a report format.
15:24:31 [norm]
John: Some of the tests with high ambiguity are problems for my implementation.
15:25:06 [norm]
Topic: Issue #147, are control characters allowed?
15:25:08 [Github] : Are control characters allowed in an ixml grammar?
15:25:30 [norm]
Steven: We agreed to the change, but not the errata.
15:25:39 [norm]
Micheal: I've been persuaded that "cannot" is an acceptable verb.
15:26:28 [norm]
Michael: The erratum is currently listed as proposed.
15:26:37 [norm]
Norm: If we accept it, I'll move it!
15:26:41 [norm]
Michael: I propose we accept it.
15:26:49 [norm]
Steven: Agreed.
15:26:56 [norm]
ACTION: Norm to merge it and close #147
15:26:57 [Github] : Are control characters allowed in an ixml grammar?
15:27:06 [norm]
Topic: Pull request #146, EBNF
15:27:07 [Github] : First draft of EBNF to BNF conversion document
15:27:25 [norm]
Norm: We've agreed that to merge that and hand it to Michael
15:27:29 [norm]
Steven: Ok
15:28:00 [norm]
Topic: Issue #139, continued action on Steven
15:28:01 [Github] :
15:28:12 [norm]
Topic: Issue #137, document the XML tag set
15:28:14 [Github] : We should document the XML tag set that results from parsing an ixml grammar with the ixml specification grammar
15:28:35 [norm]
Michael: We publish an XML grammar, people including myself use it, so it's useful to document it.
15:29:12 [norm]
Michael: Norm has produced mock ups and I have not attempted to read them in full. Mostly, the descriptions are elided.
15:29:24 [norm]
Michael: The formatting looks great.
15:30:04 [norm]
Michael: With one exception, either the generic identifiers need to be visually distinct, or description needs to be indented more.
15:30:40 [norm]
Michael: And generally, my instinct is to put the short description and paragraphs before the formal definition.
15:31:33 [norm]
Norm: I did it that way out of habit; that's the way the DocBook document does it.
15:32:32 [norm]
John: Is there any sense that this could get out-of-sync?
15:32:39 [norm]
Norm: No. It's generated from the spec.
15:32:57 [norm]
ACTION: Norm and Michael to do a bit of revision to improve it for further discussion.
15:33:09 [norm]
Topic: Combining grammars
15:34:15 [norm]
Norm gives a brief outline of his sketch
15:35:47 [norm]
Steven: My one main objection is that if you import something and then the author changes the grammar you're importing.
15:36:00 [norm]
Norm: That's just like any API, surely?
15:36:15 [norm]
Steven: We could have a mechanism for defining what's exported.
15:36:22 [norm]
Norm: That's more complex, but sure.
15:37:02 [norm]
Michael: I think there's going to be a curve where the more complex the needs get, the more complex the syntax.
15:37:47 [norm]
Steven: A while back, I sent a message with questions about the requirements. Are we importing text, or parsed grammars? There are lots of questions.
15:38:01 [norm]
Steven: I think a requirements document is necessary.
15:38:37 [norm]
Michael: Are questions about how the grammar appears in the imported grammar, requirements or implementation details?
15:38:43 [norm]
John: I think they're implementation details.
15:39:54 [norm]
Michael: I suppose the fact that if I hand an iXML grammar to a processor as the input string, specifying the iXML spec grammar as the input grammar, the visible XML version is currently just what you'd get for that parse.
15:41:30 [norm]
Michael: I think an argument that will come up is saying that the imported rules should be included in the XML output requires ad hoc processing for certain elements, so we might want not to do that. It loses the current invariant that processing a grammar as a string produces the expected XML.
15:42:13 [norm]
Michael: I think Steven has made a good point that we should think hard about whether or not import and export will solve problems we have. I think some capability for overriding is important.
15:42:55 [norm]
Michael: In some cases, modularity will also be important to avoid name conflicts. I think that a useful set of capabilities is exhibited for us by the rules for imports and inclusions in RELAX NG grammars.
15:43:36 [Steven]
My mail on requirements:
15:44:07 [norm]
Michael: Maybe we need to assign some actions for use cases. And I'll take an action to review RELAX NG's rules.
15:45:00 [norm]
ACTION: Norm to start a use cases and requirements document.
15:45:09 [norm]
ACTION: Michael to review RELAX NG rules and report back.
15:46:02 [norm]
ACTION: Michael to close issues #29 and #30.
15:46:03 [Github] : Are there any constraints on how or what a pragma can change in a conforming processor?
15:46:04 [Github] : Can pragmas be nested?
15:46:57 [norm]
Topic: Next meeting
15:47:07 [norm]
Steven: I have a conflict for 14 February.
15:47:22 [norm]
Norm: I'd prefer 7 to 21.
15:47:31 [Steven]
So agreed
15:47:34 [norm]
The next meeting is 7 February 2023.
15:48:19 [Steven]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:48:21 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate Steven
15:56:04 [cmsmcq]
rrsagent, make logs public
16:14:45 [cmsmcq_]
cmsmcq_ has joined #ixml