- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:52:47 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, July 13, from 08:00-09:00 Pacific time aka 11:00-12:00 Eastern time aka 15:00-16:00 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 quorate telcon [3] and the current task status [2] (have any questions, comments, or corrections ready by the beginning of the call). Regrets from Richard for July 13 Regrets from Paul July 13 Regrets from DV for July 20 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews. 3. XLink update. The LC WD of XLink 1.1 has been published: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xlink11-20050707/ We already have a PILE of comments at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ 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. Richard suggested we take NS 1.1 and revert the two substantive changes (IRI and undeclared namespaces) to create NS 1.0 2nd Ed. The WG has consensus to do that, and we got approval from the team to do so. Ongoing ACTION to Richard: Produce a draft for NS1.0 2nd Ed. We note that the IRI spec is now finished-RFC 3987-so we have to issue an erratum for NS 1.1 for this. We discussed some details of this under the XLink discussion: http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/02/xml-f2f-20050303-minutes.htm#xlink Briefly, 3987 does have some wording (the "MAY" paragraph) about what used to be called unwise characters. For the NS 1.1 erratum, the MAY paragraph doesn't apply since namespace names cannot have the unwise characters. (The MAY paragraph will be needed for XML 1.* system identifiers.) ACTION to Richard: Process an erratum to NS 1.1 to refer to RFC 3987: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt 6. Xinclude Rec was published 2004 December 30 at: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xinclude-20041220/ Our XInclude potential errata document is at: http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/01/proposed-xinclude-errata Daniel has updated the PE document with all the resolutions except a new one--see agenda item 11 below. We need to turn the PE document into an errata document. ACTION to DV: Produce a draft Errata document, using http://www.w3.org/2004/12/xinclude-errata as a starting point/template. 7. xml:id. The CR was published (2005 Feb 8) at http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-xml-id-20050208/ The test suite is at http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/xml-id/ The "central page" for the implementation report is http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/01/xml-id-implementation.html The PR issue/DoC is at http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/cr-status/status-report.html Paul sent out the xml:id PR request at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Jun/0054 We had a successful PR call last Thursday; publication of the PR is expected to be July 12th. 8. Associating stylesheets--awaiting TAG action. Henry reports that the HTML CG has been discussing this for a while. They are developing a draft statement of the issue, and Chris Lilley will raise this at the XML CG. Henry thinks the XML CG should say one of two things: 1. Have Chris send it on to XML Core; 2. Request guidance from above. Henry thinks #1 is the correct next step. ChrisL has acknowledged his action but has not yet passed anything on to the XML CG. 9. absolutivity of [base URI] Norm has asked a question about the absolutivity of [base URI]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Feb/0031 We discussed this at our f2f: http://www.w3.org/XML/2005/02/xml-f2f-20050303-minutes.htm#base-uri We have CONSENSUS that base URIs are always absolute. Then we had a further issue about base URIs in the infoset. DV asks if it's always possible to make a relative URI absolute. Consider a relative xml:base URI in a stream that has no base URI. DV thinks his implementation doesn't expect the base URI to be absolute. Richard says that, in this case, the Infoset does not define a base URI. All base URIs defined by the Infoset are absolute, but we say nothing about a base URI defined by an application. There is agreement that in the case where the base URI of an infoset is absolute, that all base URI properties in that infoset should be absolute. Richard sent email to www-tag about possible differences between what RFC 2396 and 3986 say about base URIs: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2005Apr/0077 HST spoke to Roy Fielding at the TAG meeting (2005 June 15ish), and Roy will reply to Richard's email as a first step. 11. XInclude, schema validity-assessment, xml:base and xml:lang Henry kicked this off at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Apr/0039 XInclude requires xml:base fixup with adds xml:base attributes to a document. This causes problems validating the result against the original schema if that schema doesn't mention xml:base. Norm wants the XML Schema group to have a mode that says "just assume all xml:* attributes are okay". Henry points out we even have problems with validation against DTDs in this case. It was suggested that we add to the XInclude spec: "An XInclude processor may, at user option, suppress xml:base and/or xml:lang fixup." Note, since this is "at user option" [see the XML spec for the defn of "at user option"], all XInclude processors MUST support xml:base and xml:lang fixup, but they MAY provide a user-specifiable option to suppress such fixup. We have CONSENSUS to add this phrase. ACTION to DV: Add this to the XInclude PE document with the resolution as suggested above. [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/2005Jun/0058 [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, 11 July 2005 17:55:15 UTC