- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:12:07 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
The XML Core WG telcons are every other week. Our next telcon will be July 1. Status and open actions ======================= Unicode normalization in XML 1.0 -------------------------------- Addison Phillips of I18N sent email about Unicode Normalization in XML 1.0 5th Ed.; see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0019 We have agreed on a note to add. ACTION to Francois: Process the suggested additional note as an erratum to XML 1.0 5th Edition. HTML request for clearer XML serialization ------------------------------------------ Henry raised the issue that HTML folks think the XML spec is broken because it doesn't define error recovery and doesn't discuss serialization. Simon added his understanding of the issue at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jun/0007 (second half of the message) and a thread starting with a reply from John ensued at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jun/thread.ht ml#msg8 Perhaps with this email beginning, Henry only needs to reply to that thread, but for now, I'll leave the following action: ACTION to Henry: Send email to the XML Core WG list outlining the suggestion to define a serialization spec including the rationale. Namespaces in XML 1.0/1.1 ------------------------- See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.0 and http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.1. The NS PE doc is at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html We closed NPE20 and NPE22 with no action needed; Paul informed I18N: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0055 We had CONSENSUS not to add ns prefix undeclaration to NS 1.0 3rd Ed. Paul informed XML Security at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0054 and Frederick replied (with no concerns) at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0058 ACTION to Henry: Close NPE20 and NPE22 with no action/changes. ACTION to Henry: Publish NPE29 as an erratum and move forward toward producing NS 1.0 3rd Edition. xml:id ------ The xml:id Recommendation is at http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/ The Errata document is at http://www.w3.org/2005/09/xml-id-errata John Cowan submitted a proposed erratum at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jan/0009 At one point we thought we had Consensus: The sentence "A document that uses xml:id attributes that have a declared type other than xs:ID will always generate xml:id errors" in Appendix D.3 should be deleted. But they we reconsidered. Henry sent further email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0048 We did agree that applying xml:id processing does not have any impact on the DTD/XSD validity of the document. John re-summarized his thoughts at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0008 ACTION to Henry (and others): Continue the xml:id issue discussion in email. --- Richard pointed out the following note in XML Base (just before section 3.1): This specification does not give the xml:base attribute any special status as far as XML validity is concerned. In a valid document the attribute must be declared in the DTD, and similar considerations apply to other schema languages. and suggested a similar note should go into xml:id in D.1. --- There was also some email about some typos for which we (Henry) should process an editorial erratum: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0050 ACTION to Henry: Process an xml:id erratum to correct the typos; ref http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0050 XLink 1.1 --------- See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xlink1.1 The XLink 1.1 Last Call has been published at http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xlink11-20080331/ The LC review period ended 16 May 2008. Norm has prepared an updated DoC at http://www.w3.org/XML/2008/05/xlinklc/ Paul summarized the open issues at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0045 Norm replied at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0009 ACTION to Norm: Update the DoC accordingly. There's an open question about whether the XSD/DTD should default the xlink:type attribute value. None of this effects our last call because the XSD/DTD are not normative. There was some email discussion at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jun/thread.ht ml#msg27 Henry finds the DTD/RelaxNG/XSD fragments throughout the spec unhelpful and would like to remove them (leaving them only in the appendices). There was also discussion about just what simple conformance is: does it require href or not? For example, if something has xlink:type="simple" but no href, it is still a simple link. See also http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xlink11-20080331/#app-reqs-simple But then the definition of simple link at http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xlink11-20080331/#simple-links says it associates exactly two resources, and how can it do that without an href attribute? But 4.1 does say that href is optional in a simple link. We had Norm-less consensus to define simple conformance to require href. ACTION to Henry: Modify the simple conformance XSD to make href required. ACTION to John: Modify the simple conformance RelexNG to make href required. ACTION to Norm: Update the prose in the spec to redefine simple conformance to require href. For example: "...with respect to simple links. In other words, elements..." -> "...with respect to simple links with an explicit xlink:href assignment. In other words, all and only elements..." Henry sent an XML Schema for simple-conformant XLink at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0019 ACTION to Norm, John: Review Henry's candidate basic level conformance XSD. John sent RelaxNG schemas at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0022 ACTION to Norm, Mohamed: Review John's RelaxNG schemas. We plan to skip CR and going directly to PR. Paul drafted a PR transition request at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Mar/0013 The Implementation Report at http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/01/xlink11-implementation is pitiful. We'll need to augment this to be able to request PR. ACTION to Norm: Dig up more for the XLink 1.1 implementation report. XInclude 3rd Edition PER ------------------------ See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude XInclude 2nd Edition is at: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115 ACTION to Daniel: Produce a PER-ready draft of XInclude 3rd Ed with appropriate references to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs. Associating Stylesheets ----------------------- See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss Associating stylesheets with XML version 1.0 is at: http://www.w3.org/1999/06/REC-xml-stylesheet-19990629/ The Errata document is at: http://www.w3.org/1999/06/REC-xml-stylesheet-19990629/errata Simon has requested we consider revisions; see his email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0002 and his suggested draft at http://simon.html5.org/specs/xml-stylesheet5 See also Simon's email at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0014 outlining various issues. Paul sent email giving Arbortext's behavior and other comments at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Feb/0022 Henry sent email giving Saxon behavior in various erroneous cases at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Apr/0025 The latest issues document is at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/06/assocss-issues.htm ACTION to WG members: Send to the list email with your preferences for the various issues as detailed in the above issues document.
Received on Tuesday, 23 June 2009 14:13:12 UTC