- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:13:52 -0500
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
Attendees --------- Paul Glenn xx:25 Sandra Dmitry Norm off at xx:41 Phillipe Daniel John xx:18 François Lew off at xx:41 [10 organizations (11 with proxies) present out of 11] Regrets ------- Richard, proxy to Henry and then the chair Henry Absent organizations -------------------- Univ of Edinburgh (with regrets, proxy to the chair) > 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. 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 > http://www.w3.org/2004/12/allgroupoverview.html > > The XML Core WG f2f meeting days will be Thursday and Friday, > March 3rd and 4th. Wednesday is the Plenary day to which all > XML Core WG members are invited. > > Register for the meeting at: > http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TP2005/ > > Register at the hotel: > http://www.w3.org/2004/12/allgroupoverview.html#Venue. > The negotiated room rate at the meeting hotel, Hyatt Harborside, > http://harborside.hyatt.com/property/index.jhtml is $139 (plus > 12.45% tax); this discount rate expires 5 February 2005. > > ACTION: Norm will try to set up a meeting time with the TAG > during the Tech Plen week in case we have something to discuss > with them by then. In progress--probably Thursday after lunch or later Thursday afternoon. > There should be a Technical Plenary week discussion about > "Extensibility and Versioning of XML Languages"? See > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Jan/0013 > Norm will probably participate. > > > 2.5 All XML Activity WGs have been asked to review > QA Framework: Specification Guidelines > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-qaframe-spec-20041122/ > whose Last Call Ends 28 January 2005. > > ACTION to Dmitry: Review QA Framework: Specification Guidelines > and report back to the XML Core WG by January 18th. Dmitry sent email at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Jan/0033 He had concerns about the following two requirements: 2.2 Requirement A: Identify who or what will implement the specification. ------------------------------------------------------ Dmitry was worried about doing a product search. Francois felt it was just classes of products, so that was okay. Paul had some concern that a list might exclude some class to which it should apply. We are concerned that this QA requirement is too fuzzy to be followed clearly. For example, it isn't clear if xml:id is applicable to an XHTML browser. 4.4 Requirement B: Define how deprecated feature is handled by each class of product. ---------------------------------------------------- Our problem here again is "by each class of product". ACTION to Paul: Draft a WG response and send to the WG list. > > 3. XLink update. > > We will have to make it an XLink 1.1, and we need to make a > charter change. > > The XML CG suggested that someone (SVG or XML Core) > write a WG Note that effectively outlines the desired changes > to XLink. Then, we can put through an XML Core WG charter > change that allows us specifically to issue an XLink 1.1 that > implements the changes in the Note. > > We decided to develop a WG Note "Extending XLink 1.0" that > lists the changes we suggest to XLink 1.0, and Norm has drafted: > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/xlink10-ext.html > > Paul sent notice to chairs: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2005JanMar/0006 > > We plan to approve sending in the pubrequest during this week's > telcon. The WG had CONSENSUS to send in the pubrequest for the Extensions to XLink XML Core WG Note. ACTION to Norm: Complete pubrules checks and send Paul email with the info. ACTION to Paul: Send in the pubrequest. > > 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]. > > > 5. Namespaces in XML. > > Ongoing ACTION to Richard: Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed. > > 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 > > Richard pointed out a namespace comment at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2004Dec/0000 > which requests something which is almost a different kind of schema. > > ACTION to Richard: Send email outlining the issue and your suggested > resolution. > > > 6. Xinclude Rec was published 2004 December 30 at: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xinclude-20041220/ > > It has been brought to my attention that we apparently failed > to look at the public XInclude comments list for comments > received during the PR review which is basically the October > archives for this list: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2004Oct/ > We will treat these are errata. > > DV volunteers to be editor of the XInclude errata process. > > ACTION to DV: Create a PE document for XInclude. > > > 7. xml:id. > > Our Last Call of xml:id is published at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xml-id-20041109/ > > The latest WG draft (dated 2005 January 5) is at > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html > > The (public) xml:id LC issues is at: > http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/lc-status/status-report.html > > ACTION to Norm: Update it to reflect our latest decisions and > recent emails. In progress. All issues are addressed. > ACTION to Norm: Produce a CR-ready draft of xml:id. In progress. > > ACTION to Paul: Create a (public) implementation report page. Done, see: http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/01/xml-id-implementation.html > > ACTION to JohnC: Lobby ERH to do an implementation of xml:id. ACTION continued. > We will need a test suite. > > Norm has created a test suite. > > ACTION to Norm: Put the test suite into public space. ACTION continued. > ACTION to Sandra: Create an xml:id test suite front page. In progress--needs CVS links. CR Exit criteria ---------------- See Norm's suggested text at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Jan/0035 We'll add "and report the same errors if the error is caught at all" (Norm will word better), as we note that some implementations may not be able to catch all errors. We will add "for all tests in the test suite" to Norm's point 1. We had CONSENSUS to remove items 3 and 4 in Norm's email, leaving just points 1 (as amended) and 2 for exit criteria. In response to QA's specGL issue -------------------------------- Norm added third para to section 7.1. Norm also added Section 8 about (non-)extensibility. CONSENSUS with those two additions. We believe the WD now addresses all LC comments. ACTION to Norm: Produce a CR ready draft. ACTION to Paul: Draft a CR request. We propose to a pubdate of Feb 3rd and close the CR period on March 10th (after the Tech Plenary). ACTION to Paul: Send a warning email to folks, esp. webreq, 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/2005Jan/0016 > [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 Wednesday, 19 January 2005 17:13:53 UTC