Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 November 3

Attendees
---------
Paul 
Glenn  
Sandra  off at xx:30
Dmitry  xx:08
Norm
Leonid
Richard
Henry 
Daniel
John  xx:22
Lew  xx:37, but off soon thereafter

[10 organizations (10 with proxies) present out of 12]

Regrets
------- 
François 

Absent organizations
--------------------
Microsoft
François Yergeau (with regrets)


Norm, Henry sends regrets for next week's telcon.


> 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).

Accepted.

> 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
> 
> The meeting will be held in the Hyatt Harborside, Boston:
>      http://harborside.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml
> 
> Chairs are sending in expectations this week.
> 
> The XML Activity will be asking that XSL and Query meet
> Monday, Tuesday of the week and that XML Core and XML Schema
> will meet Thursday and Friday, with the Plenary on Wednesday.
> 
> Please try to have some idea (e.g., at the 75% confidence level)
> as to whether you expect to attend or not by this week's telcon.

Those more likely to come than not include: Paul, Glenn, Dmitry,
Norm, Henry.  Richard and Daniel have hopes.  Those unlikely to
attend include: Sandra, Leonid, John.  Unknown: Jonathan, Lew,
François.

> 
> 3. Problem with xml:space in the Schema document for the XML namespace
> 
> Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org> sent us email on this at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0019
> 
> CONSENSUS to remove the default for xml:space from the schema
> for the xml namespace.
> 
> Henry has installed the updated XSD (that also has xml:id) at:
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/2001/xml.xsd
>   http://www.w3.org/2004/10/xml.xsd
> 
> There are a few more things to do to clean this up; per Henry:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Oct/0035
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Oct/0036
> 
> ACTION to Henry:  Complete clean up of xml namespace documents
> and reply to Michael cc-ing XML Core.

Done:  
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0007

> 
> 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]. 
> 
> PE 133 CDATA sections, PIs and Comments in Mixed and ANY 
> content models
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> CONSENSUS to approve and publish.
> ACTION to Francois:  Update PE and Errata documents for PE 133.
> 
> PE 134 Non-ascii chars in XML/text declaration
> ----------------------------------------------
> The xml-editor list received a comment at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2004OctDec/0003
> which is presumably asking the same question asked earlier at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2003OctDec/0048
> and which the commenter claims we never answered satisfactorily.
> 
> We had a proposed resolution at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/02/proposed-xml10-3e-and-xml11-errata#PE134
> but the commentor came back at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2004Oct/0131
> thereby requiring Francois to update the rationale.
> 
> ACTION to Francois:  Update the rationale and restart the countdown.

ACTION to Francois continued.

> 
> PE132 Validity of default attribute values (again)
> --------------------------------------------------
> This comes down to the wording in section 3.3.2 where we say
> "only the syntactic constraints of the type are required here"
> but then we argued about what "syntactic" means.
> 
> CONSENSUS:  It is a violation of the Attribute Default Legal VC 
> for the default value not to be one of those specified in the
> enumerated list for enumerated type attributes.
> 
> ACTION to John:  Propose new language for "Validity constraint: 
> Attribute Default Legal" to solve the ambiguity here.

Done:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0001

Richard thinks it looks right.

CONSENSUS to put into countdown.

ACTION to Francois:  Update the proposed resolution and put into countdown.

> 
> 5. Namespaces in XML.
> 
>   ACTION to Richard:  Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed.
> 
> 
> 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.  Henry, let us know if you
>    have any status on the review.

Henry reported that there were 7 responses, all positive.
Henry feels that should be enough to get it to go to Rec.

Henry now needs to organize a Rec call in the next week
or so.  He thinks the call should be mostly just a formality.

ACTION to Henry:  Take XInclude to Rec.

> Sandra has added ERH's tests to the CVS of the XInclude Test Suite.
> We will plan to update the tar and zip (and test suite home page)
> after the PR ends and we are ready to publish the Rec.

ACTION to Sandra:  Prepare the test suite stuff and prepare 
for Henry.

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

> 
> 7. xml:id.
> 
> The Last Call ready draft (of Oct 27 though dated Nov 9) is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html
> This includes rewrites coming out of last week's telcon and
> is therefore the version we plan to approve for publication!
> READ IT before the call and be prepared to vote for publication.

Richard sent in some email with questions for clarification:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0002 

When we say "All values of type ID within a document are unique",
if id is declared of type ID, is the following an xml:id error:
  <foo id="xxx" xml:id="xxx"/>
Or is it just that no two elements must have the same ID?
CONSENSUS:  The example is an xml:id error, so we need to 
clarify the wording.

There is also a circularity in the wording.  We need to say
"All values of type ID or xml:id attributes...."

ACTION to Norm:  Fix the wording.

"If the type of an xml:id attribute is specified using a
validation technology, the type is ID."

Does this mean that it is ok to declare

  <!ATTLIST foo xml:id NMTOKENS #IMPLIED>

provided that you don't have any such attributes in the instance?

Richard and Norm propose this is an error--CONSENSUS.

ACTION to Norm:  Fix the wording.

ID assignment occurs on a per-instance case.

CONSENSUS:  We want to avoid a per-instance processing.

ACTION to Norm:  Fix the wording.

Are xml:id values normalized?

CONSENSUS:  Yes.  Normalize xml:id before checking.

ACTION to Norm:  Fix the wording.

CONSENSUS:  Add a motherhood note urging processors to do 
xml:id assignment processing by default.

ACTION to Norm:  Fix the wording.

> We will now shoot for WG approval THIS WEEK, Nov 9th pubdate, 
> Nov 4-5 for the pub request, but still 2004 Dec 13 end of 
> LC period.
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Update the last para of the Status to indicate
> that this document is under the newer PP IP policy.

ACTION to Norm continued.

> 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.

ACTION continued (though if this doesn't happen this week,
it shouldn't hold up the pub request).

The WG has CONSENSUS to take xml:id to Last Call!!!!!

Norm should have the draft ready today; people have until
COB tomorrow to complain; Paul will send in the pub request
late tomorrow (Thursday), hopefully for Nov 9th publication.

> Norm announced he had a sax filter implementation of xml:id:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Oct/0042
> 
> 
> 8.  XML Profile.  The TAG (via Norm) asks about progress on this:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0004
> 
> We last talked about this at the March 2004 f2f:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/02/xml-f2f-20040301-minutes#profile
> 
> Norm continues to recommend that we make a profile that is the 
> same as XML 1.1 except to change the bnf so that you can't have 
> any sort of doctype decl.
> 
> Norm suggests we generate a WG Note outlining the subset.
> 
> Glenn asks about how this might affect the idea of a
> compliant XML processor.  Specifically, a processor that
> only processes this subset is not a compliant XML processor.
> 
> SOAP also forbids PIs, but we believe they can live with a 
> subset with PIs.
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Send email summarizing his suggested plan
> (though the ACTION below to check with the TAG should probably
> come first).
> 
> Norm started a TAG discussion at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Oct/0059
> but reached no denouement.
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Check with the TAG that this is something
> they still want to see worked on.
> 
> The next step would seem to be to write a summary of the 
> plan and send it out and see if it makes people happy.
> We should be sure to include at least the TAG, SOAP, the
> XML CG.
> 
> 
> [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/2004Oct/0038
> [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
>

Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2004 17:12:09 UTC