- From: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 15:22:56 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, September 7, 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. 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). 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews. xml:lang in XML 1.0 (3e) and XML 1.1 issue: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Aug/0003 CONSENSUS: The schema for the XML namespace should allow xml:lang values to include the empty string. ACTION to Henry: Update the schema for the XML namespace and send announcements to appropriate fora. --- Paul asked a question about the schema for schemas: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Aug/0008 Henry agrees that it looks like a bug that the DTD for schemas doesn't allow 0 and 1 for values of the boolean datatype. Paul sent the message to www-xml-schema-comments. ACTION to Henry: Shepherd it from there. --- Norm says the TAG says we should talk to the CSS WG about xml:id: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2005Aug/0005 But we have discussed this with the CSS WG, and they added wording to the latest spec--see the final paragraph of the section "5.9 ID selectors" at http://www.w3.org/Style/css21-updates/WD-CSS21-20050613-20040225-diff/se lect or.html#id-selectors where it mentions xml:id explicitly. ACTION to Norm: Point out the above to the TAG. 3. XLink update. The LC WD of XLink 1.1 has been published: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xlink11-20050707/ We have comments at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ ACTION to Norm: Reply as feasible and bring issues worth discussing to the WG via email. XLink 1.1: XML Base confusion ----------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ 0009 XML Base references RFC 2396 and XLink references RFC 3987 (the IRI one) which references RFC 3986 (2396-bis) for absolutization and such, but nothing has changed between 2396 and 3986 wrt absolutization. So we don't see the problem. ACTION to Norm: Take this back to the commentor. XLink 1.1: Error handling ------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ 0013 We say what the conformance criteria are but not what to do when an error is encountered. For example, what should we do if someone specifies an invalid value for one of the xlink:* attributes. Francois points out that this hasn't changed since XLink 1.0. ACTION to Norm: Craft some words along the lines of error handling being implementation dependent. XLink 1.1: XLink 1.1 in XML 1.1 ------------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ 0012 Norm suggests we just say that XLink works for both XML 1.0 and XML 1.1, and the names should just match the version being used. XLink 1.1: Integration with CSS ------------------------------- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2005JulSep/ 0018 How does XLink interact with CSS's :link selector? Francois suggests that we add a note that says "languages such as CSS should see XLink links as links." ACTION to Norm: Respond to the commenter and to the CSS WG. 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. There have been some more XInclude test suite questions recently on the list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2005Jul/ ERH is fielding them to some extent, but it would be good to have someone else (Richard, Daniel?) take a look too. 7. xml:id. The PR was published (2005 July 12) at http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/PR-xml-id-20050712/ and the PR period closed last week. 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 ACTION to Norm: Have suggested changes to the document by Sept 7 (if not this week). 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. Chris started the discussion on the XML CG list--see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-cg/2005Jul/thread.html#15 I expect the CG to pass this issue on to us this week. 9. 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/2005Aug/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 Tuesday, 6 September 2005 19:26:59 UTC