- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:34:37 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, August 29, 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). 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews. XML clarification ----------------- Norm sent email about < in attribute values at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Apr/0006 Glenn's proposed wording is at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0024 and slightly modified by http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0030 ACTION to Francois: Add this to the PE document for countdown. EXI first WD ------------ Title: Efficient XML Interchange (EXI) Format 1.0 Pre pub URI: http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/EXI/docs/format/exi.html Post pub TR URI: http://www.w3.org/TR/exi/ John's review is at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Aug/0012 Read it to decide if we want to send this in as the XML Core WG review. 3. C14N The C14N 1.1 Candidate Recommendation is published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/CR-xml-c14n11-20070621 Known Issues with Canonical XML 1.0 (C14N/1.0) WG Note has been published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-C14N-issues-20061220/ Using XML Digital Signatures in the 2006 XML Environment WG Note has been published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/NOTE-DSig-usage-20061220/ Regarding C14N 1.1: Konrad had pointed out some issues with Appendix A. He sent email with the latest suggested updated version of Appendix A and examples: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0050 There is another thread on C14N 1.1 at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Aug/thread.ht ml#msg18 4. xml:base, [baseURI], and IRIs -> HRRIs The (Second Edition) PER has been published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PER-xmlbase-20061220/ It's now waiting for us to say what should happen next--whether we want a Director's call now or not. We need to remember to correct the IP part of the Status section per http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2007JanMar/ 0000 Mike Kay thinks the defn of XML Resource Identifier is too vague. We decided to write an RFC to define XML Resource Identifier. The plan is to get this to an RFC and then reference it from XML Base (which we can then take to REC) and others. 4.5. HRRI RFC The latest HRRI draft was published as an ID on May 14 at http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-01.txt The most recent editor's draft is at http://www.w3.org/XML/2007/04/hrri/draft-walsh-tobin-hrri-01c.html Henry took an action to investigate getting I18N Core to define what we need in the latest IRI rewrite--see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Aug/0016 Review this to see if it needs any changes before sending off to I18N Core. 5. XLink update. The XLink CR was published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-xlink11-20060328/ The latest almost PR-ready XLink draft is at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/ Norm posted a DoC at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/10/xlink11-doc.html Paul wrote a SECOND draft PR request at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0059 ACTION to Norm: Complete resolution of DoC. ACTION to WG (need volunteer): Update the Implementation Report. ACTION to Norm: Produce PR-ready draft. ACTION to Norm: Produce diff/review version. HOWEVER, the actions here are pending until we get the HRRI RFC since we plan to reference it from XLink. 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 ACTION to Francois: Update the PE document per previous telcons' decisions. On PE 157, John sent email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Oct/0036 with his suggested response and a question for the WG: > Should we add specific references to UTF-16BE, UTF-16LE, CESU-8, > etc. etc. to 4.3.3? If so, we might as well remove "We consider the > first case first" from Appendix F; it's more than obvious. We agreed that, according to the spec, such a character is not a BOM. We have decided that John's email should be sent to the commentor as a response (done, see [11]), and that the only change resulting from this PE are some editorial changes as outlined in John's email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0056 ACTION to Francois: Update the PE document with John's editorial changes as the proposed resolution to PE 157. [11] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2006OctDec/0010 ---- John sent email about a new PE related to UTF-8 BOM at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2006Dec/0067 proposing the following language as a new paragraph in 4.3.3 for both XML 1.0 and XML 1.1: If the replacement text of an external entity is to begin with the character U+FEFF, and no text declaration is present, then a Byte Order Mark MUST be present, whether the entity is encoded in UTF-8 or UTF-16. ACTION to Francois: Add a new PE per John's comments above and make some suggested resolution wording. ---- Henry/Richard discussed the test suite issues raised by Frans Englich: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2007Mar/ These need to be resolved. Richard reports that the 2005 issue has been resolved in the latest draft. The one from 2006, character references with numbers with dozens of digits, may not be. ACTION: Richard to construct a test case for these issues. 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 Richard has recorded Anne's issue/proposed resolution at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata#NPE27 8. Liam requests we discuss XML 1.1 deployment. [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/2007Aug/0010
Received on Monday, 27 August 2007 15:39:09 UTC