W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > April 2009

XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2009 April 27

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:08:17 -0400
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D3020F624563@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 May 6.


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

Unicode normalization in XML 1.0
--------------------------------
Addison Phillips of I18N sent email about 
Unicode Normalization in XML 1.0 5th Ed.; see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0019

We decided to add a note; Paul sent draft wording for an erratum at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0019
which is in countdown until our next telcon and informed I18N at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0053
and Martin made a reply at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0066


HTML request for clearer XML serialization
------------------------------------------
Henry raised the issue that HTML folks think the XML
spec is broken because it doesn't define error recovery
and doesn't discuss serialization.

ACTION to Henry:  Send email to the XML Core WG list
outlining the suggestion to define a serialization spec
including the rationale.


Overlap between Powder and LEIRIs
---------------------------------
John reviewed especially section 2.1.3 of the POWDER spec at
http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/Group/powder-grouping/20090309.html#canon
and only had an issue with spaces and + signs.

Paul sent in our comment at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2009Apr/0010
and received a reply at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2009Apr/0011


Pointer Methods in RDF
----------------------
The ERT WG has issued a FPWD entitled "Pointer Methods in RDF":
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-Pointers-in-RDF-20090310/

Paul sent in the XML Core WG comment at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0020


ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 request to use "xml-model" as a PI target
-------------------------------------------------------------
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 has requested at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0001
that they be allowed to use "xml-model" as a processing instruction
target name token.

We might want to consider adding entries for xml-stylesheet and
xml-model 
to the xml namespace document at http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace.

Paul sent a draft response (to the XML Core list) at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0056


XML Test Suite
--------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-test-suite

Henry/Richard discussed the test suite issues raised by Frans Englich:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2007Mar/ 

ACTION: Richard to construct a test case for these issues.


Namespaces in XML 1.0/1.1
-------------------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.0 and
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.1.

The NS PE doc is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html

We closed NPE20 and NPE22 with no action needed; Paul informed I18N:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0055

We had CONSENSUS not to add ns prefix undeclaration to NS 1.0 3rd Ed.
Paul informed XML Security at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0054
and Frederick replied (with no concerns) at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0058

ACTION to Henry:  Close NPE20 and NPE22 with no action/changes.

ACTION to Henry:  Publish NPE29 as an erratum and move forward
toward producing NS 1.0 3rd Edition.


xml:id
------
The xml:id Recommendation is at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/

The Errata document is at
http://www.w3.org/2005/09/xml-id-errata

John Cowan submitted a proposed erratum at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jan/0009

At one point we thought we had Consensus:  
The sentence "A document that uses xml:id attributes
that have a declared type other than xs:ID will always generate 
xml:id errors" in Appendix D.3 should be deleted.

But they we reconsidered.  Henry sent further email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0048

Richard, Norm, DV, John, HT had a vigorous discussion during
our telcon of April 22 that we did not complete.  We will need 
to continue this in email.

We did agree that applying xml:id processing does not have
any impact on the DTD/XSD validity of the document.

Richard pointed out the following note in XML Base
(just before section 3.1):

 This specification does not give the xml:base attribute
 any special status as far as XML validity is concerned.
 In a valid document the attribute must be declared in
 the DTD, and similar considerations apply to other schema
 languages.

and suggested a similar note should go into xml:id in D.1.

---

There was also some email about some typos for which we (Henry)
should process an editorial erratum:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0050

ACTION to Henry:  Process an xml:id erratum to correct the typos; ref
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0050


XLink 1.1
---------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xlink1.1

The XLink 1.1 Last Call has been published at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xlink11-20080331/

The LC review period ended 16 May 2008.

Norm has prepared an updated DoC at 
http://www.w3.org/XML/2008/05/xlinklc/

Paul summarized the open issues at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0045

There's an open question about whether the XSD/DTD 
should default the xlink:type attribute value. 
None of this effects our last call because the
XSD/DTD are not normative.

ACTION to Henry, John:  Produce a basic level
conformance XSD and RelaxNG schema for XLink.

We plan to skip CR and going directly to PR.

Paul drafted a PR transition request at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Mar/0013

The Implementation Report at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/01/xlink11-implementation
is pitiful.  We'll need to augment this to be able to request PR.


XInclude 3rd Edition PER
------------------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude

XInclude 2nd Edition is at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115

ACTION to Daniel: Produce a PER-ready draft of XInclude 3rd Ed
with appropriate references to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs.


Associating Stylesheets
-----------------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss

Associating stylesheets with XML version 1.0 is at:
http://www.w3.org/1999/06/REC-xml-stylesheet-19990629/

The Errata document is at:
http://www.w3.org/1999/06/REC-xml-stylesheet-19990629/errata

Simon has requested we consider revisions; see his email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0002
and his suggested draft at
http://simon.html5.org/specs/xml-stylesheet5

See also Simon's email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0014
outlining various issues.

Paul sent email giving Arbortext's behavior and other comments at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0022

Henry sent email giving Saxon behavior in various erroneous cases at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0025

Paul sent email with suggested resolutions at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0029
and there has been some follow-up email.
Received on Monday, 27 April 2009 16:21:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 16:21:09 GMT