Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2006 September 13

We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, 
September 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
          20:30-21:30 in most of India
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).

Leonid and DV and Thomas send regrets for September 13.


2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews.

John Cowan reviewed
> CSS Module: Namespaces
> W3C Working Draft 28 August 2006
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-css3-namespace-20060828/

Paul sent in the XML Core WG response to the www-style list.
WG members who want to see the discussion should visit
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/thread.html#msg45
to see it.  There is quite a discussion, and I'm not
up for champion anything in particular, so those in
the WG interested in this issue should feel free to
post to www-style and/or start a WG discussion on our
mailing list (or raise it at this week's telcon).

---

Henry suggests that the current Editors' draft of 
Web Services Policy 1.5-Framework makes some remarks about 
xml:id and the interactions with C14N which we should 
probably review:
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/ws/policy/ws-policy-framework.h
tml?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8#Policy_Identification

ACTION to Jose for next week (after we publish the drafts):
Plan to send email to Web Services Policy WG pointing out
the notes and C14N 1.1 and asking that they review them.


3.  C14N 

We have three C14N documents all of which have been approved
for publication this Friday.  Paul has sent in the pubrequest:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Sep/0038


* First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
  Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0)
http://www.w3.org/2006/04/c14n-note/c14n-note.html

* First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
  Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment
http://www.w3.org/2006/04/c14n-note/dsig2006-note.html

* First WD of the Recommendation track:
  Canonical XML 1.1
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/WD-xml-c14n11-20060915.html


The above URLs are the publication-ready versions as of 
2006 September 8, but dated September 15th in anticipation
of publication at that time.  

They are written to be published by being copied as-is into 
the following locations:

* First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
  Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0)
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-C14N-20060915/Overview.html

* First WD of an XML Core WG Note:
  Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-DSIG2006-20060915/Overview.html

* First WD of the Recommendation track:
  Canonical XML 1.1
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xml-c14n11-20060915/Overview.html

---

Some notes on the C14N 1.1 WD:

Richard thinks the "diff markup" of 3986 is enlightening
and should actually appear in the spec.

Regarding referencing 3986 instead of 2396, we plan to leave 
the normative text and references of c14n 1.1 as is for a 
first public working draft, but to add a note in the "status 
of this document" section that says that the section on xml:base 
is expected to evolve along with the group's work on that 
recommendation.  [Actually, we didn't put any such wording
into the status.]


4.  xml:base, [baseURI], and IRIs.

At the f2f, we had CONSENSUS to change the 
xml:base spec to make it clear we allow IRIs as the 
value of xml:base. We also want to allow IRIs in the 
infoset [baseURI] information item.

One paragraph in the Infoset says the baseURI may
have unescaped characters, but elsewhere it says
the baseURI follows XML Base which points to RFC 2396.
If we change XML Base, we shouldn't have to change
the Infoset spec much.

We need to think about incorporation of 3986 and 3987.

Richard is working on a new draft currently at
http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/xmlbase-2e/

The "Editor's Notes" section outlines expected changes.


5.  XLink update.

XLink is now in CR--published at
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-xlink11-20060328/ 

Norm sent some email about his test suite at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Mar/0066

Henry has put up Norm's test suite and code, referenced at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/03/xlink11-tests
Norm's tool itself at
http://www.w3.org/2006/08/showxlinks/showxlinks
is member only.

Paul wrote a draft PR request at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Jul/0001

ACTION to Norm:  Create an XLink DoC.

ACTION to Norm:  Post to the WG mailing list something to
show that any valid XLink 1.1 document can be programmatically 
converted into an equivalent XLink 1.0 document.

ACTION to Norm:  Provide a few more tests for the test suite.

The old version XLink in section 5.5, we talk about values
of href attributes.

In the new version, we talk about IRIs and XML Resource 
Identifiers and other ways of encoding.  So it's unclear
now what to do about spaces in href attributes.  Compare
http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink11/#link-semantics and the
wording above it in section 5.4.1 at
http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink11/#xml-resource-identifier

Norm thinks instead of spaces, we should now say non-URI
characters. 

ACTION to Norm:  Make a suggestion how best to fix this.


6. XML 1.0/1.1 4th/2nd Editions published 2006 August 16:

 Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fourth Edition)
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816

 Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1 (Second Edition)
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml11-20060816

John Cowan raised an issue with a "typo" in these specs at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Sep/0013

ACTION to Henry:  Check if this issue is something that can
be fixed in place.

Richard notes that there were some comments sent to the
xml-editor list:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2006JulSep/0004
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2006JulSep/0005

ACTION to Francois: Add the above two issues to the PE document.


7. Namespaces in XML 1.0/1.1 2nd Editions published 2006 August 16:

 Namespaces in XML 1.0 (Second Edition)
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names-20060816

 Namespaces in XML 1.1 (Second Edition)
 http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-names11-20060816

ACTION to Richard:  Record Anne's issue/proposed resolution
in the Namespace PE document.


8. 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 Errata document at
http://www.w3.org/2004/12/xinclude-errata 

Daniel has drafted XInclude 2nd Edition with all 
the errata (including the IRI one) applied. Result is 
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/04/XInclude/REC-xinclude-20060423.html
with a diff version at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/04/XInclude/REC-xinclude-20060423-review.html

Still need to handle errata document for the new edition
and other front matter.

Paul sent an UPDATED draft PER request at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Aug/0039

DV reports that there are a few changes in the XInlude 
errata that could benefit from a test suite. 
PEX1, PEX6 and PEX11 could affect conformance and we should
add test cases to the test suite for these situations.  DV's
email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Aug/0033
outlines such tests.

ACTION to DV:  Add the tests suggested in the email to the test 
suite at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2001/XInclude-Test-Suite/
and updated http://www.w3.org/XML/Test/XInclude/ also.

Last week we voted to take XInclude 2nd Ed to PER, but Paul
found there were too many issues with the front matter to 
do so--see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Sep/0029

ACTION to DV:  Address Paul's email and produce another draft.


9.  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.


10.  Henry raises that RFC 3023 is out of date and the draft
replacement has expired.  

Chris has gotten the source and made the changes.

There is a draft at
http://www.w3.org/2006/02/son-of-3023/draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml-02.tx
t
that can be reviewed now with comments sent to the XML Core
mailing list and/or Chris Lilley.

Paul sent some comments on 3023bis to the XML CG at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-cg/2006Apr/0026

Henry says Chris is going to take the XML CG input outlined at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-xml-cg/2006Apr/0019
and produce another draft.

Chris and Henry also are backing "xpointer scheme" down 
from "registered" to "pending" in the registry.

We will now await a new draft from Chris.

When 3023bis becomes a reality, we might have some
specs that need updating for the reference, but we
don't expect any major changes.


[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/2006Sep/0022

Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 14:31:14 UTC