- From: François Yergeau <francois@yergeau.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 07:31:54 -0700
- To: Paul Grosso <pgrosso@arbortext.com>
- Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
I won't be able to make it today. -- François Paul Grosso a écrit : > [Ignore the previous copy that was prematurely sent. paul] > > 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]. > > ACTION to Francois: Update the PE document including > issues raised on public-xml-testsuite@w3.org. > > > 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. > > ACTION to Richard: Take a look at the above exchange > and let us know if you think we need to respond. > > > 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 a couple weeks ago. > > 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 > > Rec-ready draft is at > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/xml-id.html > with a diff version at > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xmlid/diff-20050906.html > and a Doc at > http://www.w3.org/XML/2004/xml-id/pr-status/status-report.html > > Henry, when can we expect a director's decision? > > > 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 > The XML CG will continue to discuss it for a while. > > > [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 Wednesday, 7 September 2005 14:32:02 UTC