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

XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2009 November 9

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 16:05:23 -0500
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D302115DC42F@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 November 18.


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

SC 34/WG 1 use of xml-model PI
------------------------------
We had responded to an SC 34/WG1 request to be able to use xml-model
for a PI target.  Our response is at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0011

We received a response at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/0001
to which Paul replied at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/0021

But then Mohamed, as liaison, reported that there would be problems 
with JTC1 writing the spec and then having W3C publish it.  One 
solution would be for us to write the spec (WG Note or Rec?) and 
then ISO would reference it.

ACTION to Henry:  Investigate the possibilities of having XML Core WG
write an xml-model spec.

Paul sent email to SC34 rescinding our agreement to let them
use xml-model until we can figure out how to go about it:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/0039


3023-bis
--------
A new draft of 3023-bis was at
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/son-of-3023/draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml-04.ht
ml

I gather this was discussed at TPAC, and a new proposed draft is at
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/son-of-3023/latest.html

ACTION to Henry:  Provide notes or at least some summary of whatever
discussion occurred at TPAC.

Paul sent comments on this latest draft at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Nov/0054


XHTML character entity support
------------------------------
Starting at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Nov/0000
there was quite a thread that I can't really follow.
Can someone summarize what the issue might be for XML Core
and suggest what kind of response, if any, we should make?


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 1.0 2nd Ed Errata document is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/xml-names-errata

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

NS 1.0 3rd Ed PER is at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PER-xml-names-20090806/
and the review was generally successful.  We had a few comments
that we addressed; the DoC is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/10/disposition.html
and the Rec-ready document is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/04/xml-names-2e/xml-names-10-3e.html

The WG approved publication as a Rec.

ACTION to Henry:  Submit a transition/publication request for 
NS 1.0 3rd Ed to go to Rec.

There seems to be an outstanding issue at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2009Oct/0004

ACTION to Henry:  Suggest how we might handle the NS 1.0 3rd Ed
push back from Bjoern Hoehrmann.


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.


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.

The latest editor's draft (of the PR) is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/
and a diff-with-the-last-CR draft is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/Overview-diff.html

Henry finds the DTD/RelaxNG/XSD fragments throughout the spec unhelpful 
and would like to remove them (leaving them only in the appendices).
Henry specifically referenced the example immediately preceding 5.3.
But this was in the CR, so we will probably leave it, but we will
remove the default for xlink:type.

Henry has updated the DTDs and sent things to Norm. 

ACTION to Norm:  Update the draft with the correct DTD, XSD, and RNC.

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

Norm created an updated IR at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/ir.html

ACTION to Norm:  Adding a mention of the test suite at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/03/xlink11-tests to the IR.

ACTION to Norm:  Create a diff between 1.0 and the 1.1 PR ready draft.


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

The latest issues document with CONSENSUS resoltions is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/06/assocss-issues.htm

The penultimate editor's draft of AssocSS 1.0 2nd Edition is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/09/xml-stylesheet.html

We had some discussion at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Sep/thread.ht
ml#msg24
and
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/thread.ht
ml#msg14

Simon produced another draft at:
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/09/xml-stylesheet.html

ACTION to Paul and others:  Review and comment on the latest
Associating stylesheets draft at 
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/09/xml-stylesheet.html
Received on Monday, 9 November 2009 21:06:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:16:41 UTC