The XML Core WG telcons are every other week. Our next telcon will be June 6. 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 with a target pubdate of June 14. 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. 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. 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. XInclude -------- We got a comment about the XInclude spec at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jan/0013 Paul suggested some specific wording to clarify the xi:fallback at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jan/0023 Henry suggested wording to clarify xml:lang fixup at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jan/0022 We had CONSENSUS to make these editorial errata. ACTION to Daniel: Process these as (editorial) errata to the latest XInclude spec.Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 14:20:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:35 GMT