W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > March 2008

Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2008 March 12

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:55:11 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D3020AB968DD@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>


Attendees
---------
 John 
 Glenn
 Paul 
 Richard
 Norm
 Henry

[6 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 9]

Regrets
------- 
François 
Daniel, proxy to the chair

Absent organizations
--------------------
A-SIT
François Yergeau (with regrets)
Daniel Veillard (with regrets, proxy to the chair)


> 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).

Accepted.

> 
> 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews.
> 
> CURIEs et al.
> -------------
> The XHTML2 Working Group plans to take CURIE Syntax 1.0 at:
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20080122/ to Last Call.
> 
> Both Norm and Henry have reviewed it on the Tag list:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0050
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0053
> 
> XML would have to change for CURIEs to do what they want to do.
> 
> The key issue with CURIEs is the restriction on name start
> characters for the value of ids (which is now an NCName).
> 
> Henry asks us to consider changing the type of an id attribute
> from NCName to NMTOKEN.
> 
> Norm sent his thoughts on redefining QNames at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0030
> 
> John suggests we shouldn't change QNames--which are for element
> and attribute names--but perhaps come up with another term--or
> just use the term CURIEs--for this new concept.
> 
> Philippe says that sparql has already come up with a CURIE-like 
> concept (and it is already a Rec):
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdf-sparql-query-20080115/#QSynIRI
> 
> Henry has done some research on the use of non-names for ids
> on the web.
> 
> Norm blogged on a possible XML 2.0:
> http://norman.walsh.name/2008/02/20/xml20
> 

Henry doesn't propose to do anything here.

Henry points out that 3023bis references xpointer (framework)
which requires an NCName, so it doesn't allow CURIEs.

If we change xpointer framework, they would get some of what
they want, but short of significant changes, they can't get
what they want, so they will probably go ahead doing things
we don't really like.

Henry suggests there is no point having XML Core do what the
TAG is going to do, so we can let it go.

> ----
> 
> October Technical Plenary
> -------------------------
> The next Technical Plenary is scheduled for October in Cannes:
> http://www.w3.org/2008/10/TPAC/Overview.html
> We need to decide if we wish to meet there.
> 

Norm thinks we should plan to meet, though we might
find ourselves cancelling if we have nothing to discuss.

Henry agrees.

CONSENSUS to plan to participate.

ACTION to Paul:  Send in our TPAC plans.

> ----
> 
> Element Traversal Specification Review
> --------------------------------------
> We have been asked to review 
> Element Traversal Specification (Web API WG)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-ElementTraversal-20080303/
> 
> John reviewed it at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Mar/0003
> and found no issues for us.  Philippe concurred at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Mar/0005

ACTION to Paul:  Send in our "review".

> 
> 3.  C14N 
> 
> The C14N 1.1 PR has been published:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PR-xml-c14n11-20080129/
> 
> Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0) WG Note 
> has been published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-C14N-issues-20061220/
> 
> Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment 
> WG Note has been published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-DSig-usage-20061220/
> 
> 
> 4.  XML 1.0 5th Edition
> 
> The XML 1.0 5th Edition PER has been published at
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PER-xml-20080205/
> 
> 
> 5.  XML 1.0/1.1 4th/2nd Editions published 2006 August 16:
> 
>  Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition)
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816
> 
>  Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1 (Second Edition)
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml11-20060816
> 
> Henry/Richard discussed the test suite issues raised by Frans Englich:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2007Mar/ 
> 
> These need to be resolved. 
> 
> Richard reports that the 2005 issue has been resolved in the 
> latest draft. 
> 
> The one from 2006, character references with numbers with 
> dozens of digits, may not be. 
> 
> ACTION: Richard to construct a test case for these issues.
> 
> At some point in the future (e.g., six months after XML 1.0 5th
> Edition is a Recommendation) we might consider deprecating XML 1.1.
> 
> 
> 6. Namespaces in XML 1.0/1.1 2nd Editions published 2006 August 16:
> 
>  Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition)
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816
> 
>  Namespaces in XML 1.1 (Second Edition)
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816
> 
> Richard has recorded Anne's issue/proposed resolution at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata#NPE27
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Look into Anne's (two) comments at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2007Oct/
> 
> ---
> 
> We discussed processing an erratum to NS 1.0 that adds the 
> ability to undeclare a namespace prefix in NS 1.0.
> 
> We could probably make NS 1.0 a copy of NS 1.1 with appropriate
> minor changes.
> 
> 
> 7.  LEIRIs
> 
> Martin's latest IRI draft (defining LEIRIs in section 7) is at 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-bis-02.txt
> 
> Martin's latest email is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0042
> 
> Paul's summary of what comes next spec-by-spec is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0045
> 
> 
> 8.  XML Base 2nd Edition 2nd PER
> 
> The (Second Edition) XML Base PER has been published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PER-xmlbase-20061220/ 
> 
> Richard has produced a PER-ready draft of XML Base at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/xmlbase-2e/
> 
> We will plan to publish this as a second PER in the March
> timeframe with the understanding it can't go to Rec until 
> the IRI RFC is republished.
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Add a para to the SOTD explaining that we
> will await for the 3987bis to become an RFC before going to Rec.
> 
> ACTION to Richard: Update refs (to XML and NS) to be undated.
> 
> Paul drafted a transition request for XML Base 2nd Ed (2nd) PER at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0049
> 
> ACTION to Henry, Philippe, and Richard:  Review Paul's draft
> transition request for XML Base.
> 
> We will plan for the WG to approve to go to PER on our next
> telcon on March 12.
> 

CONSENSUS to take XML Base 2nd Edition to PER (second time). *******

ACTION to Paul:  Send in the transition request.

> After the transition is approved, Paul makes a pub request
> and Henry writes and sends out an announcement.
> 
> 
> 9.  XLink update.
> 
> The XLink CR was published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-xlink11-20060328/ 
> 
> The latest almost PR-ready XLink draft is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/
> 
> Norm posted a DoC at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/10/xlink11-doc.html
> 
> Paul wrote a SECOND draft PR request at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0059
> 
> We decided the next step would be another LC.

> ACTION to Norm:  Produce diff/review version.
> 
> ACTION to Norm: Produce a LC-ready draft of XLink 1.1 with 
> a reference to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs.

Norm provided an update at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/ and
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/Overview-diff.html
see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Mar/0010
for the email.

In section 3.3, point 4, s/elments/elements/

In section 5.4, delete "[XML Base] is not IRI-friendly" note.

> 
> John suggests we have two levels of conformance at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0044

Conformance level 1 requires understanding just simple links
whereas level 2 requires understanding everything.  These are
processor conformance levels ("3.3 Application Conformance").

ACTION to Norm:  Amend section 3.3 to reflect two levels of
application conformance, simple and complete.

We will plan to approve going to LC during our next telcon
in two weeks.

We plan to skip CR this time.

ACTION to Paul:  Send out an announcement about our upcoming
LC (and no CR) plans for XLink 1.1.

Note: There is a publication moratorium April 15-28.

> 
> 10.  XInclude 3rd Edition
> 
> XInclude 2nd Edition is at:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115
> 
> LEIRI-related changes for the 3rd Edition:
> 
> 3.1, href attribute is a LEIRI
> 
> See also 4.1.1 (details TBD) which can't reference XML 1.1
> since we don't define XML Resource Identifiers in XML 1.1.
> Just replace that para with the "They are LEIRIs" para.
> 
> See also
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0007
> for more details on the necessary changes.
> 
> ACTION to Daniel: Produce a PER-ready draft of XInclude 3rd Ed
> with appropriate references to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs.
> 
> 
> [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/2008Feb/0023
> 
Received on Wednesday, 12 March 2008 15:55:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 12 March 2008 15:55:46 GMT