W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > December 2004

Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 December 15

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:33:05 -0500
Message-ID: <F13E1BF26B19BA40AF3C0DE7D4DA0C0302080C29@ati-mail01.arbortext.local>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>


We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, 
December 15, from
          08:00-09:00 Pacific time aka
          11:00-12:00 Eastern time aka
          16:00-17:00 UTC
          16:00-17:00 in Ireland and the UK
          17:00-18:00 in middle (most of) Europe
on the Zakim W3C Bridge, +1 617 761 6200, passcode 9652#.
We also use IRC channel #xmlcore on irc.w3.org:6665 .

See the XML Core group page [1] for pointers to current documents
and other information.  If you have additions to the agenda, please
email them to the WG list before the start of the telcon.

Please also review our group page's task list [2] for accuracy and
completeness and be prepared to amend if necessary and accept it
at the beginning of the call.

Agenda
======
1. Accepting the minutes from the last telcon [3] and
   the current task status [2] (have any questions, comments,
   or corrections ready by the beginning of the call).


2. Miscellaneous administrivia.

The next W3C Technical Plenary Week will be 28 February 2005
through 4 March 2005:
     http://www.w3.org/2002/09/TPOverview.html

ACTION: Norm to coordinate a liaison.


3.  XLink update.

Norm posted a draft[10] with diff[11]; there has been 
some discussion[12].

We will have to make it an XLink 1.1, and we need to make a
charter change.  We would either have to have specific
requirements put into the charter, or we'd have to write
a Requirements Document first.

The XML CG suggested that someone (SVG or XML Core)
write a WG Note that effectively outlines the desired changes
to XLink.  Then, we can put through an XML Core WG charter
change that allows us specifically to issue an XLink 1.1 that
implements the changes in the Note.

Henry thinks the WG Note approach is a good idea.


4. XML errata.  The published 1.0 errata document is [8], the
   published 1.1 errata document is [9], and the NEW PUBLIC
   Potential Errata (PE) document is [7]. 

PE135: When to check entity WFness according to 4.3.2
-----------------------------------------------------
The root of this issue appears to be the WF of entities that are
declared but never referenced.

Glenn: If we're going to make this clarification, I'm not sure why
internal general entities are the only places where we would do this.
Is this yet another case where the outline of the spec causes to have
statements scattered along one dimension but if someone wants to
gather them together in one section, they're not completely
cross-referenced. This may just be a case where we need to tie the
statements about parsed entities together better. Maybe not enough
things are links.

ACTION: Glenn to review PE135 and see if he can propose a solution.

PE136: XML 1.1 processors accepting XML 1.0 documents
-----------------------------------------------------
Glenn: In an earlier draft, I think we waffled a bit. And so I think
that we settled on the MUST.

Some discussion about whether we should change SHOULD to MUST in 2.8 or
if we should just drop the relevant sentence.

Norm expresses reservations about leaving the statement about 1.1
processors accepting 1.0 documents until way down in the document.

Glenn observes that this may have just been a reminder about 1.0 vs. 1.1
because it's been a long time since the discussion of version numbers
began.

PROPOSED resolution (in COUNTDOWN until Jan 5): Remove the sentence.

PE137: Improper RFC2119 "MAY"
-----------------------------
Is the "MAY" in the first paragraph of Section 2 an RFC2119 "MAY" or
just a regular English "may"?

Tim Bray is correct, we should reword this sentence either
lowercasing the MAY or removing it entirely.

  In addition, the XML document is valid if it meets certain further
  constraints.

PROPOSED resolution (in COUNTDOWN until Jan 5): Replace the sentence
with the above suggested rewording.

PE138: Further fix to E05
-------------------------
Editorial:  Fix the title attribute of the link.

ACTION to Francois:  Update PE doc for PE 136, 137, and 138.


5. Namespaces in XML.

  Ongoing ACTION to Richard:  Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed.

Paul checked with W3C folks about whether we can
fold editorial errata from 1.1 back into 1.0 2nd Ed
and our plan is acceptable:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0041

Richard pointed out a namespace comment at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2004Dec/0000
which requests something which is almost a different kind of schema.


6. Xinclude PR was published Sept 30 at:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-xinclude-20040930/
   and announced to the AC at
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2004JulSep/0043 

   The AC review closed October 29.  

We are now expecting a Dec 20th publication date.

Paul has updated status and things; pub-ready files are at:
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/12/REC-xinclude-20041220/

Testimonials have been requested.

ACTION to Philippe:  Work with W3T to publish XInclude.

Sandra has sent new test suite stuff to Henry.

ACTION to Henry:  Update the test suite home page with what
Sandra sent to you.

Someone from DIWG sent email about XInclude--see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Dec/0010
Any thoughts on how to respond?  (Feel free to Reply to the 
above email before the telcon with any thoughts.)

It has been brought to my attention that we apparently failed
to look at the public XInclude comments list for comments
received during the PR review which is basically the October
archives for this list:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2004Oct/
I'm assuming we can treat most of these as errata, but I would 
be interested if anyone has a chance to glance at these messages 
and let us know if there are any glaring issues.


7. xml:id.

Our Last Call of xml:id is published at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xml-id-20041109/
The Last Call review will have ended by this week's telcon.

The (public) xml:id issues is at:
http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/wd-status/status-report.html
[Not up to date as of the writing of this agenda, but
all issues are closed.]

ACTION to Norm:  Update the xml:id issues document.

We also will need an issues list for the Last Call.

Norm announced he had a sax filter implementation of xml:id:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Oct/0042



paul

[1] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core
[2] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#tasks
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Dec/0008
[7]
http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/02/proposed-xml10-3e-and-xml11-errata.html
[8] http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-3e-errata
[9] http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V11-1e-errata
[10] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/
[11] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/diff.html
[12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0057
Received on Monday, 13 December 2004 14:34:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:32 GMT