- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:51:40 -0500
- To: XML Core WG <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
Attendees --------- Paul Glenn Arnaud Jonathan Dmitry Norm Richard Henry xx:13 Lew Daniel [9 organizations (9 with proxies) present out of 12] Regrets ------- Leonid François Absent organizations -------------------- NIST John Cowan François Yergeau (with regrets) >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. Review of other working drafts. David Fallside requests[12] review > of SOAP MTOM, XOP, and SOAP Resource Representation Header. > >ACTION to Norm (who has reviewed them): Send reply to the XMLP WG. Done. >3. Administrivia Regrets from Paul for next week; Norm will chair. Regrets also from Daniel. >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]. > >PE125-129 (all editorial) are in countdown until this telcon. All are APPROVED. ACTION to Francois: Update PE and Errata documents accordingly. >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/ > >Regarding IDs and IDREFs, we have some reference fixup wording at: >http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/CR-xinclude-20040413/#references-property >but it needs slight modification to account for the fact that >the references property is a list (at least, that's what the >scribe thought was the issue). > >ACTION to Henry: Suggest corrected wording for the above referenced section. Henry suggests no changes are needed: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0013 CONSENSUS to close this with no action needed. No need to track this as a CR comment. >The latest issues doc is at: >http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xinclude-cr-comments-3 > >ACTION to Jonathan: Reflect our decisions in the DoC and respond to commentors. > >Glenn responded to Eliotte on the comments list about xi-12: xml:lang at: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2004Jul/0003 >and Elliotte rebutted at: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2004Jul/0007 >We may need to discuss. We have two rejections of our resolution (both from ERH): Syntactically incorrect IRIs in href attributes ----------------------------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0010 Elliotte doesn't like this left as an implementation option. Either we need to show why there are implementations in which it is impossible to catch this as a fatal error or we should make it fatal. We had a discussion including the fact that java.net.url cannot detect this error, so we still think "should" is better than "must". ACTION to Jonathan: Respond to Elliotte with some cases that shows it may sometimes be impossible for all implementations to detect the fatal error. lang implementation report -------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Jul/0012 Elliotte is basically saying that we should add lang to the infoset, not via XInclude. We agree that would make more sense, but the I18N group wants lang in there sooner rather than later (we added this stuff in response to an I18N comment to XInclude), and we felt this was the quickest way to get it in. This was also added in response to our f2f discussion with the TAG this past March. XML Schema validation adds properties to the infoset, so we see no reason that another spec can't add properties to the infoset. The WG decided to leave the spec as it stands in this area and raise this issue with the Director at the PR call. ACTION to Jonathan: Convey our decision to ERH. >ACTION to Jonathan: Check that we are done with issues and are ready to exit CR. ACTION to Jonathan: Upload the issues document and the latest spec. We have a test suite, but we need to get implementation feedback for the test suite. We may need to add a test for xml:lang to the test suite. Known implementations: ERH, DV, Richard. ACTION to Richard, DV: Provide a table giving results of running the test suite on your implementation. 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. ACTION continued. >[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/0006 >[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, 14 July 2004 11:57:45 UTC