Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2004 November 24

We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, 
November 24, from
          08:00-09:00 Pacific time aka
          11:00-12:00 Eastern time aka
          16:00-17:00 UTC
          16:00-17:00 in Ireland and the UK
          17:00-18:00 in middle (most of) Europe
on the Zakim W3C Bridge, +1 617 761 6200, passcode 9652#.
We also use IRC channel #xmlcore on irc.w3.org:6665 .

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.

Paul sends regrets; Norm will chair.

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).


1.5. Miscellaneous administrivia.

The next W3C Technical Plenary Week will be 28 February 2005
through 4 March 2005:
     http://www.w3.org/2002/09/TPOverview.html

The meeting will be held in the Hyatt Harborside, Boston:
     http://harborside.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml

The TAG has asked if we wish to have any f2f time with them
during the Technical Plenary week.  We're not sure yet, but
two possible areas are:
 *  issues with the XML Profile
 *  the XForms xml-stylesheet PI issue


2. XForms WG Note on xml-stylesheet and XForms.

See the draft Working Group Note at
http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/Group/Drafts/stylesheet-pi

See the thread starting at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004OctDec/0022
especially Norm's message at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2004OctDec/0030

See also JohnC's comments at:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0037
where he argues it is reasonable to treat this as a stylesheet
and raises the issue on how to recognize things via the MIME type.

Arnaud would like to know more about the motivation and
why they are using the xml-stylesheet PI instead of
something else.

Paul requested further info from the Forms WG:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-forms/2004OctDec/0138
No response as of this Agenda writing; Paul just pinged again:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-forms/2004OctDec/0172

Richard initially agreed with Norm's comment, but now he feels
that what JohnC said makes some sense.

We need to discuss more with at least Richard, Norm, JohnC on
the call.


3.  XLink erratum/update.

Norm has suggested a possible update to XLink at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0033
where we say that an element that has an xlink:href but 
does not have an xlink:type should be treated as if it
had a "simple" link type.

Several of us have expressed support for this idea,
and no one objects.

Upon research, we believe we could make this change via 
the PER route, but we would need to show some implementations
(which shouldn't be hard, I'm told).

XLink is not in any WG's charter.  PLH agrees that, if it
would be in anyone's charter, it would be in XML Core.

ACTION to PLH:  Investigate the charter and patent issue 
as well as confirming that we can use the PER route (e.g., 
XLink 1.0, 2nd Ed.).

Paul raised this issue with the XML CG.  The consensus was
for the XML CG to ask the XML Core WG to pick up this task,
but then the XML CG needs to work through charter issues.
(PLH and Michael Sperberg-McQueen will investigate.)

Assuming charter issues get addressed, we should be able 
to do this via a PER.  Perhaps someone can suggest the
actual wording for the change so that the WG can agree
on it.


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]. 

We have several new PEs we might consider.


5. Namespaces in XML.

  Ongoing ACTION to Richard:  Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed.

Makoto thinks we should fold all our errata into an NS1.0 2nd Ed,
but we should not fold in our other editorial changes from 1.1
into 1.0 2nd Ed.  He sent his comments at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2004Nov/0004
wherein he objected to our folding editorial changes that were not
processed as errata back from 1.1 into 1.0.

Paul checked with W3C folks about whether we can
fold editorial errata from 1.1 back into 1.0 2nd Ed
and our plan is acceptable:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Nov/0041


6. Xinclude PR was published Sept 30 at:
   http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/PR-xinclude-20040930/
   and announced to the AC at
   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2004JulSep/0043 

   The AC review closed October 29.  

We will shoot for a Dec 8th publication date (though that
can only be tentative, since it depends on the Comm team).

ACTION to Philippe:  Work with W3T to prepare XInclude for Rec.

ACTION to Paul:  Update the WD for Rec (dates, status).

Sandra has sent new test suite stuff to Henry.

ACTION to Henry:  Update the test suite home page with what
Sandra sent to you.


7. xml:id.

Our Last Call of xml:id is published at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xml-id-20041109/

The (public) xml:id issues is at:
http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/wd-status/status-report.html
[Not up to date as of the writing of this agenda, but
all issues are closed.]

ACTION to Norm:  Update the xml:id issues document (though no
immediate need this week).

We also will need an issues list for the Last Call,
though we don't need it until mid-December.

Norm announced he had a sax filter implementation of xml:id:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Oct/0042


8.  XML Profile.  The TAG (via Norm) asks about progress on this:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2004Sep/0004

We last talked about this at the March 2004 f2f:
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/02/xml-f2f-20040301-minutes#profile

Norm continues to recommend that we make a profile that is the 
same as XML 1.1 except to change the bnf so that you can't have 
any sort of doctype decl.

Norm suggests we generate a WG Note outlining the subset.

Glenn asks about how this might affect the idea of a
compliant XML processor.  Specifically, a processor that
only processes this subset is not a compliant XML processor.

SOAP also forbids PIs, but we believe they can live with a 
subset with PIs.

ACTION to Norm:  Send email summarizing his suggested plan
(though the ACTION below to check with the TAG should probably
come first).

Norm started a TAG discussion at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/tag/2004Oct/0059
but reached no denouement.

ACTION to Norm:  Check with the TAG that this is something
they still want to see worked on.

The next step would seem to be to write a summary of the 
plan and send it out and see if it makes people happy.
We should be sure to include at least the TAG, SOAP, the
XML CG.


[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/2004Nov/0043
[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

Received on Monday, 22 November 2004 18:24:47 UTC