W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > June 2007

XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2007 June 11

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:33:17 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D30207B1EF73@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>



The XML Core WG telcons are every other week.

Our next telcon will be June 20.

Status and open actions
=======================

XML clarification
-----------------
Norm sent email about < in attribute values at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Apr/0006

Glenn's proposed wording is at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0024
and slightly modified by
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0030

ACTION to Francois:  Add this to the PE document for countdown.


C14N 1.1
--------
The CR-ready C14N 1.1 draft is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2007/05/CR-xml-c14n11-20070509 

Paul sent out a draft CR request at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0040

We had WG consensus to go to CR.

ACTION to Henry:  Organize a CR telcon for the 11th or 12th
(or later that week) with a target pubdate of June 21.


HRRI RFC
--------
The latest HRRI draft was published as an ID on May 14 at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-01.txt

Martin Duerst raise security issues with the HRRI draft at 

ACTION to Norm:  Get Martin to send his comments to an accessible 
list (or get his permission to forward them to such).

ACTION to Norm:  Copy/reference/incorporate the security 
text from the IRI RFC and add text mentioning the security risk
inherent in allowing the use of control characters in HRRIs.

ACTION to Norm:  Get Martin's acceptance of our changes.

ACTION to Norm:  Publish another ID once we have
agreement from Martin on the security wording.

In addition, Martin sent some more comments at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0000
to which Richard replied at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0003

It looks like this will drag out, since I don't see us
making progress until the next telcon when we can all
discuss this unless we have more email about this soon.


XML 1.0/1.1
-----------
ACTION to Francois:  Update the PE document per previous 
telcons' decisions.

On PE 157, John sent email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Oct/0036
with his suggested response and a question for the WG:

> Should we add specific references to UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, CESU-8,
> etc. etc. to 4.3.3?  If so, we might as well remove "We consider the
> first case first" from Appendix F; it's more than obvious.

We agreed that, according to the spec, such a character is not a BOM.

We have decided that John's email should be sent to the commentor
as a response (done, see [11]), and that the only change resulting from 
this PE are some editorial changes as outlined in John's email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0056

ACTION to Francois:  Update the PE document with John's editorial
changes as the proposed resolution to PE 157.

[11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2006OctDec/0010

----

John sent email about a new PE related to UTF-8 BOM at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0067
proposing the following language as a new paragraph in 4.3.3
for both XML 1.0 and XML 1.1:

	If the replacement text of an external entity is to
	begin with the character U+FEFF, and no text declaration
	is present, then a Byte Order Mark MUST be present,
	whether the entity is encoded in UTF-8 or UTF-16.

ACTION to Francois:  Add a new PE per John's comments above
and make some suggested resolution wording.
Received on Monday, 11 June 2007 20:35:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:35 GMT