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

Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 October 27

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:09:25 -0400
Message-ID: <F13E1BF26B19BA40AF3C0DE7D4DA0C0301141CB6@ati-mail01.arbortext.local>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>


[9 organizations (9 with proxies) present out of 12]


Absent organizations
NIST, with regrets
Lew Shannon

> 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
> The meeting will be held in the Hyatt Harborside, Boston:
>      http://harborside.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml

Chairs are sending in expectations this week and next.

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 next week.

> 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:

ACTION to Henry:  Complete clean up of xml namespace documents
and reply to Michael cc-ing XML Core.

> 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
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> This is in countdown until this week's telcon; check the
> language and rationale at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/02/proposed-xml10-3e-and-xml11-errata#PE133

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.
> I see at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-core-wg/2003OctDec/0233
> JohnC suggested:
>   8) NEL issue can be bypassed by using different transcoding
> conventions.
>   See
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2003OctDec/0048.html .
>   Recommendation:  Reject.  Special code pages for XML are 
> undesirable, 
>   and older mainframe tools can't cope with them anyway.
> This is in countdown until next week.  Read the proposed resolution at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/02/proposed-xml10-3e-and-xml11-errata#PE134

The commentor came back at
thereby requiring Francois to update the rationale.

ACTION to Francois:  Update the rationale and restart the countdown.

> PE132 Validity of default attribute values (again)
> --------------------------------------------------
> The PE document suggests this might just be a problem with the test
> suite.

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.

We believe that SGML requires that the default value be one
of the enumerated types.

We seemed to be leaning toward making the examples in PE132
invalid (as the test suite currently says).

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.

> 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 
>    Please be sure your AC reps vote on it by October 29!!!!!!!!

There have been very few votes on this to date--please be sure
to ping your AC rep to vote on XInclude this week!

> 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.
> 7. xml:id.
> The Last Call ready draft (of Oct 20 though dated Nov 2) is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html
> READ IT and be prepared to approve for LC publication at
> this week's telcon.

JohnC does not understand why "invalid" documents should be
given undefined behavior rather than the behavior of documents
that are not validated.

We had CONSENSUS to have Norm rewrite his "invalid document"

ACTION to Norm:  Rework section 4 according.

> We will shoot for Nov 2 for the pubdate, Oct 28-29 for the 
> pub request, 2004 Dec 13 end of LC period.

We will now shoot for WG approval on Nov 2, Nov 9th pubdate, 
Nov 11-12 for the pub request, but still 2004 Dec 13 end of 
LC period.

> 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.

> 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.
> 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.

ACTION to Norm continued.

> ACTION to Norm:  Check with the TAG that this is something
> they still want to see worked on.

Norm started the discussion at
but reached no denouement.

ACTION to Norm continued.

> 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
> [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/0019
> [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, 27 October 2004 16:09:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:33 UTC