Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2008 February 27

Attendees
---------
John xx:12
Paul 
Richard
François 
Philippe

[5 organizations (5 with proxies) present out of 9]

Regrets
------- 
Henry
Norm
Glenn

Absent organizations
--------------------
A-SIT
IBM (with regrets)
Sun (with regrets)
Daniel Veillard


> 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).

Accepted.

> 
> 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews.

> By way of ADVANCED NOTICE, our upcoming telcons of March 12 
> and 26 will occur one hour earlier local time for partipants 
> in the UK and Europe due to a ridiculously early switch to DST 
> on the part of those in North America.

> 
> CSS has replied to a comment of ours.  Our comment is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2006Sep/0045
> and the response is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2008Feb/0061
> 
> Paul researched the history and resolution of these comments at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0031
> and believes our comments have been addressed.

CONSENSUS to approve the resolution of our comments.

ACTION to Paul:  Reply approving resolution of our comments
on CSS3-Namespaces.

> ---
> 
> CURIEs et al.
> -------------
> The XHTML2 Working Group plans to take CURIE Syntax 1.0 at:
> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-curie-20080122/ to Last Call.
> 
> Both Norm and Henry have reviewed it on the Tag list:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0050
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2008Feb/0053
> 
> XML would have to change for CURIEs to do what they want to do.
> 
> The key issue with CURIEs is the restriction on name start
> characters for the value of ids (which is now an NCName).
> 
> Henry asks us to consider changing the type of an id attribute
> from NCName to NMTOKEN.
> 
> Norm sent his thoughts on redefining QNames at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0030
> 

John suggests we shouldn't change QNames--which are for element
and attribute names--but perhaps come up with another term--or
just use the term CURIEs--for this new concept.

Philippe says that sparql has already come up with a CURIE-like 
concept (and it is already a Rec):
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdf-sparql-query-20080115/#QSynIRI

> Henry has done some research on the use of non-names for ids
> on the web.

Norm blogged on a possible XML 2.0:
http://norman.walsh.name/2008/02/20/xml20

> 
> 3.  C14N 
> 
> The C14N 1.1 PR has been published:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PR-xml-c14n11-20080129/
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 4.  XML 1.0 5th Edition
> 
> The XML 1.0 5th Edition PER has been published at
>  http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/PER-xml-20080205/
> 
> 
> 5.  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
> 
> 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.
> 
> At some point in the future (e.g., six months after XML 1.0 5th
> Edition is a Recommendation) we might consider deprecating XML 1.1.
> 
> 
> 6. 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
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Look into Anne's (two) comments at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2007Oct/
> 
> ---
> 
> We discussed processing an erratum to NS 1.0 that adds the 
> ability to undeclare a namespace prefix in NS 1.0.
> 
> We could probably make NS 1.0 a copy of NS 1.1 with appropriate
> minor changes.
> 
> 
> 7.  LEIRIs
> 
> Martin's latest IRI draft (defining LEIRIs in section 7) is at 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-duerst-iri-bis-02.txt
> 
> Martin's latest email is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0042
> 
> Paul's summary of what comes next spec-by-spec is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0045
> 
> 
> 8.  XML Base 2nd Edition 2nd PER
> 
> The (Second Edition) XML Base PER has been published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/PER-xmlbase-20061220/ 
> 
> Richard has produced a PER-ready draft of XML Base at:
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2006/09/xmlbase-2e/
> 
> We will plan to publish this as a second PER in the March
> timeframe with the understanding it can't go to Rec until 
> the IRI RFC is republished.

ACTION to Richard:  Add a para to the SOTD explaining that we
will await for the 3987bis to become an RFC before going to Rec.

ACTION to Richard: Update refs (to XML and NS) to be undated.

ACTION to Paul:  Draft a transition request for XML Base 2nd Ed 
(2nd) PER.  Try to explain why we do not need a call.  Be sure
to refer to the previous PER request.

We will plan for the WG to approve to go to PER on our next
telcon in two weeks.

After the transition is approved, Paul makes a pub request
and Henry writes and sends out an announcement.

> 
> 9.  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
> 
> We decided the next step would be another LC.
> 
> LEIRI reference:
>  Section 5.4: 
> 
>  replace para starting:
> 
>   The value of the href attribute is an XML resource identifer...
> 
>  with:
> 
>   The value of the href attribute is a LEIRI [ref].
> 
>  and then delete subsection 5.4.1 but move the para about 
>  relative references up into 5.4.
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Suggest any other appropriate changes to XLink 1.1.
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Produce diff/review version.
> 
> ACTION to Norm: Produce a LC-ready draft of XLink 1.1 with 
> a reference to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs due 2008 February 13.

John suggests we have two levels of conformance at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2008Feb/0044

> 
> 10.  XInclude 3rd Edition
> 
> XInclude 2nd Edition is at:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115
> 
> LEIRI-related changes for the 3rd Edition:
> 
> 3.1, href attribute is a LEIRI
> 
> See also 4.1.1 (details TBD) which can't reference XML 1.1
> since we don't define XML Resource Identifiers in XML 1.1.
> Just replace that para with the "They are LEIRIs" para.
> 
> See also
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2007Dec/0007
> for more details on the necessary changes.
> 
> ACTION to Daniel: Produce a PER-ready draft of XInclude 3rd Ed
> with appropriate references to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs.
> 
> 
> [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/2008Feb/0023
>

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 16:44:03 UTC