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

Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 September 15

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:58:04 -0400
Message-ID: <F13E1BF26B19BA40AF3C0DE7D4DA0C03783A88@ati-mail01.arbortext.local>
To: "XML Core WG" <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>


[11 organizations (11 with proxies) present out of 12]


Absent organizations

> 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:

The meeting will be held in the Hyatt Harborside, Boston:

> 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.
> ACTION to Henry:  Make the actual change once we've figured
> out how/when to announce this.
> We have made announcements to xml-dev, xml-schema-dev, and to chairs.
> Any responses?


ACTION to Henry:  Draft a new schema and send it to the XML Core list.

> 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]. 
> 5. Namespaces in XML.
>   ACTION to Richard:  Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed.
> 6. Xinclude CR was published April 13 at:
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-xinclude-20040413
>    The updated test suite cover page is at
>    http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/XInclude/ 
> The PR-ready draft is at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/07/PR-xinclude/
> The public DoC (aka latest issues list) is at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/07/ExIT-xinclude/issues.html
> [Note: The Director view displays incorrectly in IE6.0.]
> Richard put up public results for ERH, DV, and himself:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xinclude-implementation/report.html
> Paul sent in the PR request at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004JulSep/0090
> Remaining ACTIONs are:
> f.  Paul:  Make any adjustments necessary in the PR request.
> g.  Henry:  Help arrange a PR call and ensure that 
>             xinclude-team-review@w3.org is still "working".
> h.  Paul, Norm, Henry, Jonathan:  Participate in the PR call.

The call is currently scheduled for 2004 Sept 21 10:00 Boston time.

Richard has an issue raised by ERH:

>>  [In section 4.2] the XInclude spec says, 
>> "The */document information item/* of the acquited infoset 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-xinclude-20040413/#dt-acquired-infoset> 
>> serves as the inclusion target 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-xinclude-20040413/#dt-inclusion-target> 
>> unless the |xpointer| attribute is present and identifies a 
>> subresource."
> That looks wrong: the simplest fix is to delete "and identifies a
> subresource".  I assume it meant "and the resource it identifies turns
> out not to be the whole document".

CONSENSUS to delete "and identifies a subresource".

Richard raised another issue arising from ERH's tests:
including something as text but it's marked as text/xml, 
then do you read its encoding decl from the XML decl?

In the XInclude spec, we don't seem to allow use of internal
info to determine encoding.  We want to add something here
to allow encoding determination via the presence of a BOM.

We have CONSENSUS to add:

  if the document begins with a unicode byte order mark, 
  it is in the encoding specified by that BOM.

in section 4.3 as the penultimate bullet in the bulleted list.

We've gotten questions back in response to the PR request:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004JulSep/0090 ff

* The IR doesn't have links to the implementations themselves.

ACTION to Richard:  Add some links in the IR to the various

* The features tested by Nist-include-xx, where xx is
	19, 24, 25, 48, 49, 51, 52, 56
and eduni-3 appear to be under-implemented. 

ACTION to Richard:  Go through those listed and send email.

ACTION to Richard:  Ask ERH to rerun our test suite as it is now
in the CVS, esp. eduni-2 and eduni-3.  Also ask for a link.

* We don't seem to have an IRI test (nist-include-57 was removed).

To test non-ascii names we would have to make the test suite
work on non-local files, and we haven't yet done that.  Support
for IRIs is mostly in the URI support level underneath, not in 
the XInclude layer itself.

* More comments from Martin on errors in the XInclude spec wrt IRIs.

In http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004JulSep/0098
Martin points out a typo due to a cut and paste from the NS
spec where we also had this wrong.

Also, in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004JulSep/0097 
Martin suggests replacement for our IRI text.

We have CONSENSUS to insert Martin's first suggested replacement.

We also need to CHANGE the IRI reference from 02 to 09 or so.

ACTION to Paul:  Ask Martin for a reference to the IRI draft.

> 7. xml:id.
> Norm has collected the xml:id issues, now (public) at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/issues.xml
> and put a new version of the draft at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html
> ID Strictness 
> -------------
> Commentor figures that non-validating parsers shouldn't have 
> to check for xml:id validity.
> Currently, conformance to xml:id does require non-validating 
> parsers to check for xml:id validity; of course, no parser is 
> required to conform to xml:id.
> Richard send email outlining our options at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Aug/0024
> He outlines options of strict, moderate, lax id checking.
> Richard would like to know that ids, for example, don't 
> contain spaces.
> Then we started asking if id values should be NCName or Name.
> Tentative CONSENSUS that we would do "moderate" where id values 
> should be NCName (with some uncertainty).
> We left open what kind of error it would be if the above isn't 
> the case.
> Norm sent email with his latest proposal:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0003
> and there was some follow up email discussion.  We discussed this
> a bit last week, but we still need to discuss more.
> There is email from Dan Connolly re:
> how does XInclude mix with XML Schema? XSLT?
> at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0014
> Norm replied, and Dan rebutted, and DV commented; see the thread at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0034
> 8.  XML Profile.  The TAG (via Norm) asks about progress on this:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0004
> [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/2004Sep/0031
> [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, 15 September 2004 15:58:23 UTC

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