W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org > July to September 2001

XML Information Set PR Review

From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 10:02:46 -0500
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010905113912.028174a8@notesmail.arbortext.com>
To: xml-comments@w3.org
Cc: w3c-archive@w3.org, www-xml-infoset-comments@w3.org

     I, W3C Advisory Committee Representative:

     #1      Given Name:             -		Paul
     #2      Family Name:            -		Grosso
     #3      Email Address:          -		paul@arbortext.com

     as representative for

     #4      Employer (W3C Member):  -		Arbortext

     review the "XML Information Set" Proposed Recommendation:

           http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/PR-xml-infoset-20010810/

     as follows: (please complete the points below by marking with an X
     between the [brackets].)

     -----------------
     1) As representative of the above company, I suggest that the XML
     Information Set specification (mark one only with X):

     #1A     [  ]    be published as a W3C Recommendation as is or with
                    insubstantial changes suggested by others;

     #1B     [ X]    be published as a W3C Recommendation only after
		     consideration of the following changes 
		     (please see section 4);

     #1C     [  ]    returned for further work due to substantial 
                     problems (please see section 4);

     #1D     [  ]    not be published as a specification, and 
		     discontinued as a W3C work item. 
		     (please see section 4);

     #1E     [  ]    My organization abstains from this review.


     2) My organization (mark only one with X):

     #2A     [  ]    produces products addressed by XML Information Set;

     #2B     [  ]    expects to produce products conforming to XML
                    Information Set, as noted in point 5;

     #2C     [  ]    does not produce products addressed by XML 
		     Information Set specification.


     3) Intellectual Property Rights (mark one only with X):

     Please note W3C's IPR policy: If you have intellectual property
     applicable to these specifications, please disclose according to
     W3C's IPR policy:

     #3A [X] To the best of my knowledge, my organization does not have
     patents which form essential technology for implementing the
     "XML Information Set"  specification.

     #3B [ ] We have disclosed our patents following the procedure
     at:

        http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010719/policies.html#ipr


     4) Detailed Comments, Reasons, or Modifications:
        In addition to any comments you may have, please indicate your
        responses to questions 1 and 2 as noted earlier in this ballot.
        This may include, but is not restricted to, technical issues
        or issues associated with patent claims associated with the
        XML Information Set specification.
---
The Infoset specification provides some important core technology
to the XML activity, and it should be made a W3C Recommendation at
this time.

However, since the PR draft was written, a few relatively minor 
points that need clarification have been discovered, and these
should be considered by the XML Core WG in developing the wording
of the final Recommendation:

1.  Since, per the XML 1.0 Recommendation, XML system identifiers
    can contain characters not allowed in a URI reference and therefore
    must be escaped, the Infoset spec should clarify whether the value of
    the [system identifier] property of the document type declaration 
    information item consists of the escaped or unescaped string.

2.  There is potentially a similar issue with respect to namespace names,
    and there may need to be similar clarification.

3.  In the [references] property of attribute information items, the
    PR currently says:
	If the type is IDREF or IDREFS and any of the IDs does not 
	appear as the value of an ID attribute in the document...then 
	this property has no value or is unknown....
    However, the PR does not address the case where there are multiple
    elements with the same ID value; a statement similar to that quoted
    above should be added to clarify.
---
     5) Expected implementation schedules, where known, without 
	commitment, as appropriate in 2B above:

     6) Disclosure of Review response (Mark all appropriate items with X)

     #6A [X] My organization is willing to share its review with the W3C
     Membership. (please copy <w3c-archive@w3.org> in this case.)
Received on Friday, 7 September 2001 11:13:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 March 2009 11:12:24 GMT