W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > January 2012

Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 January 25

From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 13:15:18 -0500
To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <m2aa5b3ayx.fsf@nwalsh.com>
> See the XML Core group page [1] for pointers to current documents
> and other information.  If you have additions to the agenda, please
> email them to the WG list before the start of the telcon.
>
> Please also review our group page's task list [2] for accuracy and
> completeness and be prepared to amend if necessary and accept it
> at the beginning of the call.

Chair: Paul
Scribe: Norm
Present: Paul, Henry, Norm, Glen, Liam, John

Next telcon: 8 February
Regrets: Liam, Norm (likely)

> Agenda
> ======
> 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.

Paul is leaving PTC Arbortext at the end of this month. Hopes to
continue as an invited expert. Liam reports that he's approved the
form and expects approval by Friday or Monday.

> xml-stylesheet and HTML5
> ------------------------
> Henry took an action to file a bug about xml-stylesheet
> handling.  Done:
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14689
>
> Henry has done a lot more testing and filing of results to date.
>
> ACTION to Henry: File a bug against the HTML5 spec saying that it 
> should support styling XML with CSS.

Continued.

> The CSS2 spec says something about styling XML with CSS.
> Henry also notes http://www.w3.org/Style/styling-XML.en.html.
>
> Henry's tests are at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2011/11/ssTests/
> You need to look at the README and README2 files there.
>
> issues with the Polyglot draft
> ------------------------------
> Henry sent email with various potential issues at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0037
>
> We should discuss each point and decide what we think.
>
> We discussed the point about the spec recommending [P1] the use 
> of the UTF-8 BOM.
>
> [P1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide/#character-encoding
>
> Discussion didn't finish, continue in email.  
>
> ACTION to John:  Post summary/followup of our telcon discussion about
> use of the UTF-8 BOM in HTML5.

Henry thinks we converged on this in email on Wednesday 11 January: See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Jan/index.html

Henry: I think we should file an issue against Polyglot about the BOM.

ACTION: Henry to file an issue against Polyglot about the BOM.

Paul: Let's call John's action finished or superseded and replace it
      with Henry's action.

Henry: We didn't talk about xml:space and xml:base.

-> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0037

Henry: I think that xml:base and xml:space are allowed on MathML and SVG.

Norm: Really?

Henry: Polyglot is contradictory in some respects because I see that
xml:base is allowed.

John: There are two questions that I don't really understand. Does Polyglot
recommend anything, or does it just report facts.

Henry: It's reporting facts.

John: And what does it mean to ignore an attribute. Does that mean it
isn't reported in the DOM or does it mean that it doesn't have the
canonical effect that it's supposed to have.

Henry: In 5.2, the document says in passing that:

   ...there are other prefixed attributes that can be used beyond
   xlink:href (such as xml:base). Polyglot markup does not declare
   these prefixes via xmlns. The prefixes are implicitly declared in
   XML and are automatically applied to the appropriate attributes in
   HTML.

despite the fact that it says elsewhere that xml:base can't be used.

Liam: That just sounds like a bug.

John: Right, but which bug.

Henry: Section 1 lays out the facts that Polyglot reports.

Henry: I think what happens in HTML parsers is that these attributes
(xml:*) get reported as being in no namespace with a local name that
includes a colon.

Henry: The way in which this is contradictory is that the HTML5 spec
says about xml:base that it must not be used in HTML documents.

John: This may simply be version skew. That's always my first
explanation.

Henry: Wait! The HTML5 spec appears to say that xml:lang and xml:base
are allowed on MathML and SVG elements.

Some discussion of the track that Polyglot is on and whether that
makes sense.

Paul: We've only got five minutes left. We have point 4 here in 
Henry's original mail. It sounds like there's some contradiction...

John: Or that it's incomplete at least.

Paul: ...so is it worth filing something?

Henry: Yes, but I should draft it first.

ACTION: Henry to draft an issue regarding xml:space and xml:base in
        the Polyglot draft for WG review.

[ Skip ahead to XInclude agendum ]

> 3.  XML 1.0--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-errata
>
> We are creating an XML 1.0 6th Edition and XML 1.1 3rd (or
> perhaps 6th) Edition.
>
> ACTION to John:  Update the XML sources for XML 1.0 and 1.1
> to reflect any errata and the LEIRI reference.
>
> On hold awaiting resolution of IRIbis.
>
> 4.  XML Test Suite.
>
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-test-suite
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Construct a test case for the XML test suite 
> issues raised by Frans Englich:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2007Mar/ 
>
> 5.  Namespaces in XML 1.0/1.1--see
>    http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.0
>    and http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.1.
>
> 6.  LEIRIs--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#leiri
>
> We had planned to issue the following spec editions referencing LEIRIs:
>
> * XML 1.0 6th Edition
> * XML 1.1 3rd Edition
> * XInclude 3rd Edition
>
> We continue to wait to see what might happen with IRIbis.
>
> 7.  xml:id--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-id
>
> 8.  XML Base 2nd Ed--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-base
>
> 9.  XLink 1.1--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xlink1.1
>
> 10.  XInclude 3rd Ed--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude
>
> We are creating an XInclude 3rd Edition.
>
> ACTION to Paul:  Update the XML sources for Xinclude to reflect 
> any errata and the LEIRI reference.
>
> On hold awaiting resolution of IRIbis.
>
> XInclude @xpointer when parse="text"
> ------------------------------------
> Previous email discussion at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Oct/thread.ht
> ml#msg46
> and
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/thread.ht
> ml#msg12
>
> We seem to have three choices:
>
> 1.  allow use of the @xpointer attribute when parse=text
> 2.  add a new "@textptr" attribute to use when parse=text
> 3.  add a new "@fragid" attribute to use in all cases and possibly
>     deprecate the @xpointer attribute
>
> We are leaning toward choice #2 which Norm will include in the
> XInclude 1.1 requirements document and initial draft.
>
> Extending XInclude
> ------------------
> We've discussed extending xinclude to copy attributes on the 
> xinclude element down to the root included element.
>
> Some issues include:
>
> 1.  exactly what attributes to copy?  Henry and Liam preferred to 
> copy un-prefixed attributes (except those in the xinclude spec) too.
>
> Norm worries what this would mean if we add another attribute
> in the XInclude spec?
>
> Henry wants to be able to have unprefixed attributes copied
> onto the root included element.
>
> Henry: we could add a new "copy me without prefix" namespace 
> to xinclude.
>
> Norm doesn't need that, but could live with it.
>
> 2.  what to do about attribute conflict (error or one or the other
> wins).
>
> 3.  whether we should "log" additions (e.g., via an attribute that 
> says what attributes were added).
>
> At first, we didn't think this was much of a concern, but then we
> realized perhaps it was something worth considering.
>
> 4.  whether we should have some way for targets to say whether they
> can be xincluded and/or, when included, have attributes added.
>
> XInclude 1.1
> ------------
> This would address the two issues discussed above:
> * @xpointer when parse="text"
> * copying attributes from the xinclude element to the root
>   included element
>
> If we want to produce an XInclude 1.1, we will need an amended 
> charter as indicated by Ian at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Dec/0014
> but we can discuss requirements now.
>
> Norm drafted an initial XInclude 1.1 requirements document at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2012/01/xinclude-11-requirements/

Paul observes that we could publish this as a note at any time.

Paul: Norm, should we publish it?

Norm: Sure. I banged it out pretty quick, but if everyone likes it...

Paul: Ok, I think it's probably worth getting it out there.
...We should publish a requirements document before we ask for a charter
revision.
...I wonder if this is enough of a use case for improved communication.

Paul: I'll send some email and we can do a little cleanup.

> (Eventual) ACTION to Norm:  Produce the initial XInclude 1.1 
> editor's draft.
>
> 11.  Associating Stylesheets.
>
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss
>
> AssocSS 2nd Ed is now a Recommendation at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-xml-stylesheet-20101028/
>
> 12.  xml-model
>
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-schemas
>
> The Second Edition has been published as a WG Note at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/NOTE-xml-model-20110811/
>
> paul
>
> [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/2012Jan/0005

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 413 624 6676
www.marklogic.com

Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 18:15:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 January 2012 18:15:51 GMT