Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 August 4

Attendees
---------
 Paul 
 Glenn 
 Richard 
 Daniel

[4 organizations (4 with proxies) present out of 12]

Regrets
------- 
Sandra
Norm  
John
Henry
Dmitry

Absent organizations
--------------------
Microsoft 
NIST (with regrets)
Oracle (with regrets)
Sun (with regrets)
W3C (with regrets)
François Yergeau 
John Cowan (with regrets)
Lew Shannon

The telcon for next Wednesday, August 11th is CANCELLED.

Our next telcon will be Wednesday, August 18th.  

> 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).
> 

We didn't have quorum, so we will approve these at our next telcon.

> 
> 2. Neither Norm nor Paul can make next week's telcon, and Henry is
>    on holidays.  We may cancel the telcon of the 11th.

We have decided to CANCEL the telcon of the 11th.

> 
> 3. Problem with xml:space in the Schema document for the XML namespace
> 
> Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org> sent us email on this at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0019
> 
> Norm thinks Mimasa is correct; we should not provide a default for
> xml:space.
> Glenn agrees.  Richard agrees.
> 
> We should remove the default for xml:space from the schema.
> 
> We have CONSENSUS that we should remove the default from xml:space,
> but we'd like to wait until Henry is back to be sure.
> 
> ACTION to Henry (when he returns):  Comment and perhaps fix 
> the schema.
> 
> 
> 4. XML errata.  The published 1.0 errata document is [8], the
>    published 1.1 errata document is [9], and the NEW PUBLIC
>    Potential Errata (PE) document is [7]. 
> 
> PE 130 Missing paren in section 5.2 in XML 1.1
> ----------------------------------------------
> Editorial.  We should add the missing paren (was in 3rd Ed).
> 
> CONSENSUS to do so.
> 
> ACTION to Francois:  Put into countdown until August 11.
> 
> PE 131 Space or S in XML decl.
> ------------------------------
> Commentor says we use Space in the XML decl, but S elsewhere.
> 
> Actually, XML decl is (correctly) using S, and S is just the 
> same as in
> XML 1.0.
> 
> So the bug is that in SDDecl, it refers to x#20+ instead S:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml11-20040204/#NT-SDDecl
> 
> We had CONSENSUS this was an editorial oversight, and that we should
> change x#20+ to S in the SDDecl production.
> 
> ACTION to Francois:  Record the above resolution and put into 
> countdown.
> 
> 
> 5. Namespaces in XML.
> 
>   ACTION to Richard:  Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed.
> 
> 
> 6. Xinclude CR was published April 13 at:
>    http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-xinclude-20040413
>    The updated test suite cover page is at
>    http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/XInclude/ 
> 
> Sandra had sent email with what she thought were the needed 
> corrections
> at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0022
> and she is waiting for confirmation or corrections on that.
> 
> Richard and Glenn agree that Sandra should do as outlined in 
> her email.
> 
> ACTION to Sandra:  Make the changes and commit to CVS.

Done.

> The PR-ready draft is at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/07/PR-xinclude/
> 
> The public DoC (aka latest issues list) is at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/07/ExIT-xinclude/issues.html
> At the top, this document says it's a DoC for the 3rd XInclude CR.
> Are we really at the third CR, or just the second?
> 
> Am I reading the DoC correctly to say that we have closed all issues?
> 
> Are there any "closed" issues for which we have rebuttal we wish to
> discuss?
> 
> In the DoC, I don't understand "Ack" column of the table.  What does
> "review reply unaddressed" mean?
> 
> I thought we got some push back from Elliotte that requires that we
> indicate review non-acceptance of our resolution, but I don't see that
> reflected in the DoC.
> 
> At 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0025 
> Richard had sent a format for submitting test reports and an XSLT 
> to convert the report to an HTML page.  He also included his actual
> results.
> 
> We still need implementation feedback from Daniel and 
> Elliotte (and any others from who we can).
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Send Elliotte an email on how to present his
> results, cc-ing Paul.

Richard did send Elliotte email; no response yet.

> 
> ACTION to DV:  Provide a table giving results (using 
> Richard's files) of
> running the test suite on your implementation.
> 

ACTION continued.

> ACTION to Paul:  Write a PR request once we are ready to exit CR.
> 
> 
> 7. xml:id.
> 
> We should say that the values of xml:id must be
> Names according to the XML version of the document.
> 
> ACTION: xml:id editors to update the draft to allow XML 1.0 and XML
>         1.1 Names as appropriate.
> 
> We need to get into processing xml:id comments and producing a new
> draft.
> 
> ACTION to Daniel:  Work toward producing a new draft.
> 
> Norm may have some cycles to work on this after mid-August.
> 
> [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/2004Jul/0034
> [7]
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/02/proposed-xml10-3e-and-xml11-errata.html
> [8] http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-3e-errata
> [9] http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V11-1e-errata
> [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004AprJun/0058.html 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2004 11:21:20 UTC