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

RE: "Profiling" XML 1.0

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 19:22:11 -0400
Message-ID: <F13E1BF26B19BA40AF3C0DE7D4DA0C033EF01D@ati-mail01.arbortext.local>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>

> From:  Norman Walsh
> Sent: Wednesday, 2004 September 01 11:37
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: "Profiling" XML 1.0
> Way back when[1], the TAG shuffled the issue of profiling XML off to
> the XML Core WG. I recall that we talked about it a bit, but it never
> went anywhere.
> Now I find that this work item is an uncomfortable state in our
> charter. A very similar uncomfortable state, as I recall, to the one
> that got the processing model work ejected. Namely, it's listed as
> "other work" but not as a deliverable.
> Anyway, the TAG brushed by the issue again on Monday and thought to
> ask, "Yeah, what did Core do with that? Where's the spec?"
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#xmlProfiles-29
> -- 

We discussed it at our f2f in Cannes in March:
and came to no particular conclusions.

The following telcon, we discussed the new charter wording:
but no mention was made of profiling.

By the next telcon, charter drafts were already being sent to W3M,
and profiling was only mentioned under "Other work" as you note above.

I was left under the impression the majority of the WG was not
in working on this item and that the W3M and AC did not see it as
enough to charter us to provide a deliverable for it.

However, we are chartered to "investigate" in this area, so we could
renew discussion on it.  But I'd prefer to wait a couple weeks to get
XInclude and xml:id to their next stages.

Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2004 23:22:24 UTC

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