W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xsd-databinding@w3.org > March 2007

Minutes: XML Schema Patterns for Databinding F2F 13-15th February 2007

From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 21:08:55 -0000
Message-ID: <2A7793353757DB4392DF4DFBBC9522550A2016E0@I2KM11-UKBR.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: <public-xsd-databinding@w3.org>

Minutes from our F2F are now available here:

http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/databinding/7/2/F2F-databinding-minutes.html

and below for tracker's benefit:



                                   - DRAFT -

                              Databinding WG F2F

13 Feb 2007

   See also: IRC log

Attendees

   Present
          Jon Calladine (BT)
          George Cowe (Origo Services Limited)
          Paul Downey (BT)
          Yves Lafon (W3C)
          Priscilla Walmsley (W3C Invited Expert) (Tuesday, by phone)

   Regrets
          Vladislav Bezrukov (SAP AG)

   Chair
          pauld

   Scribe
          pauld

Contents

     * Topics
         1. Administrivia
         2. Test Suite
         3. lc-erh-1 : typo "casue"
         4. lc-i18n-1 : BOM link to Unicode FAQ
         5. lc-i18n-2 : Working with Time Zones
         6. lc-i18n-3: language type to reference BCP47
         7. lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set
         8. lc-psd-1: WS-I Basic Profile compliant schema import
         9. lc-jmarsh-1: XPath Expressions Too Complex?
        10. lc-jmarsh-2: Schema Version Attribute
        11. lc-jmarsh-3: Duplicate Listing
        12. lc-jmarsh-4: Value of @mixed="false" etc
        13. lc-jmarsh-5: Grouping of R2800 and R2112
        14. lc-Microsoft-1: Support for Attributes
        15. lc-Microsoft-2: Element References
        16. lc-Microsoft-3: Nested Sequences and sequences other than
            minOccurs=maxOccurs=1
        17. lc-Microsoft-4: schemaLocation
        18. lc-Microsoft-5: maxOccurs=finite
        19. lc-Microsoft-6: Null enumerations
        20. lc-Microsoft-7: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1
            ...
        21. lc-Microsoft-8: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1
            in the same inheritance chain
        22. Pattern Detection Service
        23. lc-pwalmsley-1: Document or Element Node
        24. lc-pwalmsley-2: "node-set" should be "sequence"
        25. lc-pwalmsley-3: QualifiedLocalElements
        26. lc-pwalmsley-5: ElementFinal
        27. lc-pwalmsley-6: ImportTypesNamespace
        28. lc-pwalmsley-7: GlobalElement and GlobalAttribute
        29. lc-pwalmsley-8: @type colon
        30. lc-pwalmsley-9: GlobalElementSequence
        31. lc-pwalmsley-10: ElementMaxOccursFinite
        32. lc-pwalmsley-11: ElementEmptySequence @name
        33. lc-pwalmsley-12: ElementEmptySequence not(node())
        34. lc-pwalmsley-13, lc-pwalmsley-14:
        35. lc-pwalmsley-15: Global SimpleType Declarations
        36. lc-pwalmsley-16: GlobalSimpleType and GlobalComplexType
        37. lc-pwalmsley-17: StringEnumerationType
     * Summary of Action Items
     _________________________________________________________________

Administrivia

   gcowe: would like to change the Siebel/Origo comment in the minutes

   pauld: OK!

Test Suite

   pauld: we need to publish our reports - patterns detected in schemas
   in the wild and interoperbility of patterns with toolkits.

   yves: been working with XMLUnit. It's not perfect, but may be good
   enough.

   pauld: we need a rollup to compare individual toolkits, need to fix
   log namespace for non-namespace schemas, but looks good!
   ... Plan is for Yves to work on the rollup, pauld will work on
   detecting patterns in the wild jon and george to battle with Java
   toolkits
   ... OK today we answer comments, rest of the meeting we work on the
   reports

   BREAK

lc-erh-1 : typo "casue"

   Jonc: actually a typeo in "Advanced"

   pauld: i seem to have fixed it
   ... how do I work EXIT?
   ... Shoot me. Shoot me now!

   RESOLUTION: close lc-erh-1 as accepted

lc-i18n-1 : BOM link to Unicode FAQ

   pauld: do we have any tests for BOM?

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to write BOM examples for the testsuite
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action01]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-104 - Write BOM examples for the testsuite
   [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].

   pauld: they want us to link to
   http://www.unicode.org/unicode/faq/utf_bom.html#BOM

   paul: informative reference?

   pauld: any objections?

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add informative reference for BOM link to
   Unicode FAQ [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action02]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-105 - Add informative reference for BOM link
   to Unicode FAQ [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].

   RESOLUTION: close lc-i18n-1 as accepted

lc-i18n-2 : Working with Time Zones

   pauld: want to link to
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/
   ... looks like goodness

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add reference to
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/ [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action03]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-106 - Add reference to
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/ [on Paul Downey -
   due 2007-02-20].

   RESOLUTION: close lc-i18n-2 as accepted

lc-i18n-3: language type to reference BCP47

   reference comes from XML Schema, our spec is all boilerplate here

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add reference to BCP47 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action04]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-107 - Add reference to BCP47 [on Paul Downey
   - due 2007-02-20].

   RESOLUTION: close lc-i18n-3 as accepted

lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set

   pauld: used node-set but that's XPath 1.0
   ... Priscilla raised the same comment, and I trust both to be correct,
   however node-set is in common usage. Sequence implies order, but we
   don't care about order
   ... let's park this until Priscilla joins us

lc-psd-1: WS-I Basic Profile compliant schema import

   pauld: this pattern should really be Basic, is this a significant
   change?

   gcowe: I use this pattern quite a bit

   pauld: only way you can import a schema and be BP compliant
   ... easy to write a constrained XPath for this commonly used pattern

   any objections to adding this to Basic?

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add a Basic Pattern for BP compliant
   schema import [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action05]

   RESOLUTION: close lc-psd-1 as accepted

lc-jmarsh-1: XPath Expressions Too Complex?

   pauld: sounds a little like "too many notes, your royal highness" ;-)
   .. it is a fair comment though, our XPaths are proforma, but gnarly.
   .. Jonathan thinks XPath is complex, wonder how he'll like moving to
   the terminology as well
   ... I agree, in cases such as this we can simplify the expressions
   .. @targetNamespace is not the same as .[@targetNamespace]/ (.,
   @targetNamespace) since that returns two nodes

   jonc: is he asking us not to use this style where not needed?

   pauld: there are other XPaths which can be simplified

   jonc: will review the XPaths to simplify

   pauld: I quite like them all being the same style, would some
   introduction text help?
   ... but for this pattern, it is necessary to match xs:schema and
   targetNamesapce because we don't allow xs:schema without a
   targetNamespace!

   <scribe> ACTION: jcalladi to review XPaths for unnecessary nodes being
   matched [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action06]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Review XPaths for unnecessary nodes
   being matched [on Jonathan Calladine - due 2007-02-20].

   pauld: will reject this comment for @targetNamespace, but accept the
   thrust which is to simplify the patterns where possible

   RESOLUTION: close c-jmarsh-1 as rejected

lc-jmarsh-2: Schema Version Attribute

   pauld: how does it help with databinding?

   jonc: assumption is we're encouraging it, we're just saying it's
   allowed

   pauld: we allowed it because it's mostly harmless, tools can ignore it
   ... can we flag patterns as being noise

   gcowe: would we leave it out or move it to Advanced?

   jonc: but it's not Advanced under our criteria of doesn't fail with
   tools

   <JonC> first do no harm....

   RESOLUTION: close lc-jmarsh-2 as rejected, subject to tools working
   with the pattern

lc-jmarsh-3: Duplicate Listing

   pauld: thinks the example is demonstrating two uses of annotation,
   should be split
   ... do we want an ElementDocumentationElement and a
   SchemaDocumentationElement, etc, etc?
   ... is there value in such fine-grained patterns?

   gcowe: it's mostly ignored by tools anyway

   pauld: we could go the other way and make the example have
   ComplexType/xs:annotation SimpleType/xs:annotation, etc to be clear,
   but then that would be difficult if we moved SimpleType to Advanced at
   some point

   jonc: one pattern seems good enough

   pauld: it's confusing, maybe we need another test case, but simplify
   the example in the spec
   ... we need to test it before splitting the pattern

   <scribe> ACTION: gcowe: to split DocumentationElement example into
   more than one example / testcase [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action07]

   <trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - gcowe:

   <Yves> !rehash

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-jmarsh-3

lc-jmarsh-4: Value of @mixed="false" etc

   <JonC> I think we recognise the feeling here that it is the lack of
   problematic patterns that is of interest

   <JonC> but it is not what the basic patterns document is really about

   pauld: the pattern is Basic if tools swallow it without barfing
   ... is the @mixed!='true' really saying //@mixed!='true'

   Jonc: it's a slippery slope

   pauld: seen schemas which generate this and other defaults explicitly
   and interoperate

   RESOLUTION: lc-jmarsh-4 rejected

   pauld: this is a little like like ROOM 101

lc-jmarsh-5: Grouping of R2800 and R2112

   pauld: puzzled - R2112 is something we allow, but BP doesn't whereas
   R2800 is vice-versa
   ... let's reject it and get Jonathan to explain why, he is a BP expert
   after all!

   RESOLUTION: lc-jmarsh-5 rejected

lc-Microsoft-1: Support for Attributes

   jonc: we're about what works with toolkits now, not what might be
   removed in the future

   gcowe: we find attributes useful, certainly we don't want to move away
   from them

   <JonC> also think that we have never been in the business of setting
   the bar so very low

   pauld: I'd be sympathetic if there was a "state of the art" toolkit
   which didn't handle them.
   ... under our way of working, attributes are fine, but I think it's an
   interesting comment, and a warning things may be more constrained
   ... I'd like to be able to round-trip to and from JSON without a
   schema, and such a constraint would help greatly

   <JonC> we have identified issues with attributes and marked as
   advanced this is the way forward not removing support for them
   entirely

   pauld: our testing will help here
   ... nothing to stop Microsoft publishing their own "Very Basic"
   document using our patterns, or a few of them, anyway
   ... actually that's something we'd encourage, vendors being more
   explicit about which patterns are or are not supported

   RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-1 rejected

lc-Microsoft-2: Element References

   pauld: worries me because I use it to wrap example elements into the
   test suite WSDL

   jonc: all our schemas contain them

   pauld: I think it's a valid constraint though, and there are no
   natural equivalent in most modern programming languages (C pointers
   anyone?)
   ... well, not to a type, that is

   <JonC> but what toolkit fails with them?

   pauld: exactly, that's our criteria

   discussion of mapping global elements to programming languages

   if a sequence contains elements from a different namespace, what's the
   mapping to a C#/Java class?

   pauld: .NET annotations cope with this, no?
   ... do we need a test case for crossing namespaces, or tighten the
   pattern to just within the same namespace?
   ... nervous of defining such patterns as they need a component model
   to span schemas

   gcowe: do we need an example of spanning multiple namespaces?

   pauld: propose we split this pattern to "within the same schema
   document" and "across schemas" not namespaces, and then have an
   example to test this
   ... OK, we'll keep this open, subject to testing

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to split ElementReference into two patterns
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action08]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-110 - Split ElementReference into two
   patterns [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].

lc-Microsoft-3: Nested Sequences and sequences other than
minOccurs=maxOccurs=1

   pauld: I think they're being helpful, are we too fine-grained here?

   gcowe: it's complexity that's needed

   jonc: is maxOccurs=1 a typeo

   gcowe: think this is pushing wrapped for repeated elements
   ... modelling tools don't always generate wrapped arrays

   jonc: we may end up making bare arrays advanced subject to testing

   pauld: let's hold off on this subject to testing

lc-Microsoft-4: schemaLocation

   pauld: big +1 to that

   RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-4 accepted

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to add advice that schemaLocation is a hint
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action09]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-111 - Add advice that schemaLocation is a
   hint [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].

lc-Microsoft-5: maxOccurs=finite

   pauld: I agree with the comment!

   gcowe: we need this for our schemas

   jonc: our criteria is if tools don't reject it it's basic

   pauld: zero, one, many
   ... few tools do validation, or build an array[3] anymore, well 'C'
   might
   ... hold this open subject to testing

lc-Microsoft-6: Null enumerations

   this came from an X.694 inspired contribution

   pauld: it's valid schema, comment asks if it's useful

   do we have to justify use of patterns in the spec?

   scribe: it is listed as a "
   ... way of saying a value is Null
   ... always Null in X.694

   pauld: it is fairly Zen though, sound of no data passing
   ... what does it mean to accept this comment?
   ... will write back and explain the origin, will remain in the spec
   subject to testing, but i suspect one tool at least doesn't support
   it, so it's toast

   <JonC> advanced toast anyway

   RESOLUTION: lc-Microsoft-6 accepted

   LUNCH!

lc-Microsoft-7: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 ...

   Jonc: bare arrays

   pauld: "Bare arrays do not support the distinction between null arrays
   and empty arrays"
   ... seems like a valid comment from a code-first POV
   ... you can't send a null array with a bare array
   ... we've decided not to offer advice on chosing a pattern, is this a
   special case?

   <JonC> also valid comment from a efficiency/productivity POV e.g. XSLT

   pauld: i don't understand the efficiency comment

   jonc: tools don't bail on this

   pauld: sounds like a "Design Consideration"
   ... maybe the XSLT comment referds to A* B* C* A*
   ... seems like I might elect not to use this pattern, but does that
   mean that schemas which exhibit this pattern are rejected by tools?
   ... how strongly do people feel about this? Do we need more
   information, how widely used is the pattern?

   gcowe: we use it

   <JonC> sounds more like best practice recommendation ???

   pauld: and you're a member of the WG!
   ... it's in our spec, to lose it we have to demonstrate lack of
   support. To accept the comment we have to change the way we work. I
   might not like this pattern but if it works with tools and is used in
   Schemas in the wild, then it's basic.

   jonc: we're going to continue using wrapped as our default, but don't
   see any reason to remove as yet

   pauld: let's keep it open, subject to testing

lc-Microsoft-8: Mixing elements maxOccurs=1 and maxOccurs>1 in the same
inheritance chain

   pauld: a challenge to write an XPath for this across multiple schema
   documents, but is the comment valid?
   ... in some ways depends upon lc-Microsoft-7
   ... do we have a test case?

   <scribe> ACTION: gcowe to write a test case for lc-Microsoft-8
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action10]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-112 - Write a test case for lc-Microsoft-8
   [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].

Pattern Detection Service

   gcowe: patterns detection stylesheet,
   ... can we reference a stylesheet for the output?

   pauld: prefer to do that server side

   <scribe> ACTION: ylafon to make patterns detection service run
   stylesheet [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action11]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-113 - Make patterns detection service run
   stylesheet [on Yves Lafon - due 2007-02-20].

   gcowe: I have a version which works with file upload and URI

   yves: can we provide the source / war file for people wanting to run
   this for themselves

   gcowe: that's fine

   pauld: what about the "freshness" of the patterns.xml file used, where
   does it come from?

   ylafon: service runs from a copy of the stylesheet

   pauld: how do we get changes propogated?
   ... can we put the source code war file rollup into the WG CVS?

   gcowe: we could make the service pickup the live version, and make
   that configurable

   <scribe> ACTION: gcowe to make the detection service pick up the live
   stylesheet, configurably [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action12]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-114 - Make the detection service pick up the
   live stylesheet, configurably [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].

   <scribe> ACTION: gcowe to put patterns detection source code into WG
   CVS [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action13]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-115 - Put patterns detection source code
   into WG CVS [on George Cowe - due 2007-02-20].

   pauld: when do we go live / announce the service?

   yves: not tied to publication of our documents

   pauld: plan to announce it with publication of our reports
   ... do we consider bundling WS-I BP in our service?

   TBD

lc-pwalmsley-1: Document or Element Node

   RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-1 accepted

   pwalmsley: ok with me!

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-1 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action14]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-117 - Edit lc-pwalmsley-1 [on Paul Downey -
   due 2007-02-20].

lc-pwalmsley-2: "node-set" should be "sequence"

   pauld: we also have this as lc-drkm-1

   pwalmsley: term node-set isn't used in XPath, is order significant

   pauld: no

   RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-2 accepted

   RESOLUTION: close lc-drkm-1 as accepted

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-2 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action15]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-118 - Edit lc-pwalmsley-2 [on Paul Downey -
   due 2007-02-20].

   pauld: also closes lc-drkm-1: XPath 2.0 and node-set ?

lc-pwalmsley-3: QualifiedLocalElements

   pwalmsley: example doesn't have any elements

   http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/#pattern-QualifiedLocalElement
   s

   name of the pattern is misleading?

   pwalmsley: don't feel strongly, we can just leave it

   pauld: we have an assertion:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-patterns/#assert-QualifiedLocalElements
   -summary

   RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-3 rejected

   pwalmsley: OK with this

lc-pwalmsley-5: ElementFinal

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-5

   pwalmsley: OK with this

lc-pwalmsley-6: ImportTypesNamespace

   pwalmsley: might be invalid use of schema

   pauld: trying to capture a common pattern used within WSDL
   ... maybe we could add another clause to capture self reference in
   (@namespace = ../xs:schema/@targetNamespace)]

   pwalmsley: that would be an invalid schema

   RESOLUTION: rejected lc-pwalmsley-6

   pwalmsley: I'm OK with that

lc-pwalmsley-7: GlobalElement and GlobalAttribute

   pauld: exists not to fire the catchall

   pwalmsley: might not be necessary

   <pwalmsley> ./xs:element[@name and @type and contains(@type, ':')]/
   (., @name, @type)

   http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xmlschema-patterns-20061122/#group-Global
   Element

   pauld: simplifying is goodness

   <scribe> ACTION: pdowney to remove @name and @type from
   GlobalAttribute and GlobalElement [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action16]

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-119 - Remove @name and @type from
   GlobalAttribute and GlobalElement [on Paul Downey - due 2007-02-20].

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-7

   pwalmsley: OK with that!

lc-pwalmsley-8: @type colon

   pwalmsley: a client also encountered this issue, so happy to withdraw
   the comment

   RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-8 rejected

lc-pwalmsley-9: GlobalElementSequence

   RESOLUTION: accepted lc-pwalmsley-9

   pwalmsley: I'm OK with that!

lc-pwalmsley-10: ElementMaxOccursFinite

   RESOLUTION: accepted lc-pwalmsley-10

   pwalmsley: I'm OK, it's incorrect

   <pwalmsley> .//xs:element[@maxOccurs != ('0','1','unbounded')]

   pwalmsley: other comment in the mail on global element sequence -
   please ignore

lc-pwalmsley-11: ElementEmptySequence @name

   pauld: similar issue

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-11

lc-pwalmsley-12: ElementEmptySequence not(node())

   pauld: not (* except xs:annotation) seems good

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-12

lc-pwalmsley-13, lc-pwalmsley-14:

   pauld: we've been here before!

   <pwalmsley> analogous to 11 and 12

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-13, lc-pwalmsley-14

lc-pwalmsley-15: Global SimpleType Declarations

   pwalmsley: it's editorial, wording

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-15

lc-pwalmsley-16: GlobalSimpleType and GlobalComplexType

   pwalmsley: same again!

   RESOLUTION: accept lc-pwalmsley-16

lc-pwalmsley-17: StringEnumerationType

   <pwalmsley> withdrawn

   pwalmsley: withdraw that one, cathcall picks it up

   RESOLUTION: lc-pwalmsley-17 rejected

   pwalmsley: I'm OK with all the resolutions!

   pauld: Right, rest of our time is to be spent working on the reports -
   so we're ADJOURNED!

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: gcowe to make the detection service pick up the live
   stylesheet, configurably [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action12]
   [NEW] ACTION: gcowe to put patterns detection source code into WG CVS
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action13]
   [NEW] ACTION: gcowe to write a test case for lc-Microsoft-8 [recorded
   in http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action10]
   [NEW] ACTION: gcowe: to split DocumentationElement example into more
   than one example / testcase [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action07]
   [NEW] ACTION: jcalladi to review XPaths for unnecessary nodes being
   matched [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action06]
   [NEW] ACTION: pauld to add a Basic Pattern for BP compliant schema
   import [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action05]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to add advice that schemaLocation is a hint
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action09]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to add informative reference for BOM link to
   Unicode FAQ [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action02]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to add reference to BCP47 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action04]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to add reference to
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/NOTE-timezone-20051013/ [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action03]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-1 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action14]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to edit lc-pwalmsley-2 [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action15]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to remove @name and @type from GlobalAttribute
   and GlobalElement [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action16]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to split ElementReference into two patterns
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action08]
   [NEW] ACTION: pdowney to write BOM examples for the testsuite
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action01]
   [NEW] ACTION: ylafon to make patterns detection service run stylesheet
   [recorded in
   http://www.w3.org/2007/02/13-databinding-minutes.html#action11]

   [End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 1 March 2007 21:09:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 18 December 2010 18:20:37 GMT