The XML Core WG telcons are every other week. Our next telcon will be May 20. 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 was 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 then Addison also replied (suggesting I18N wanted something more) at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0069 We will leave our draft erratum in countdown for another couple weeks to see what I18N has to suggest. 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. 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 response at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0011 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 We did agree that applying xml:id processing does not have any impact on the DTD/XSD validity of the document. John re-summarized his thoughts at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0008 ACTION to Henry (and others): Continue the xml:id issue discussion in email. --- 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 Norm replied at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0009 ACTION to Norm: Update the DoC accordingly. 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. ACTION to Norm: Dig up more for the XLink 1.1 implementation report. 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. ACTION to everyone besides Simon and Paul: Review the latest xml-stylesheet email and indicate preferences for resolutions.Received on Monday, 11 May 2009 14:19:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 11 May 2009 14:19:30 GMT