- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:23:22 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
The XML Core WG telcons are every other week, but we have cancelled the telcon of July 4. Therefore, our next telcon will be July 18. Status and open actions ======================= 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. C14N 1.1 -------- The C14N 1.1 Candidate Recommendation is published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/CR-xml-c14n11-20070621 Konrad had pointed out some issues with Appendix A at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007May/0046 ACTION to Konrad: Send email to the XML Core list with the latest suggested updated version of Appendix A and examples. 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 We are going through Martin's comments. Recent emails include: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0038 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0041 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Jun/0044 - 47 The last four (0044-0047) are from Martin and to date have had no responses. What with emails all over each containing a different set of multiple comments, I'm not sure how to come to closure, but I urge those with input to continue the email discussion. Martin had also sent http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-iri/2007May/0000 which most of us had never seen, so we need to review that. ACTION to Richard: Review Martin's message and post to the WG list. XML 1.0/1.1 ----------- 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.
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 15:25:27 UTC