Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2009 March 11

Attendees
---------
Konrad  xx:12
Glenn 
Norm
Paul 
Richard
Henry
Daniel

[7 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 10]

Regrets
------- 
Simon

Absent organizations
--------------------
Google
Opera (with regrets)
François Yergeau


March 25 is the AC meeting, so we will cancel that call.

Therefore, our next telcon will be April 8.

> 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.
> 
> The next Technical Plenary (and AC meeting) week (TPAC week) 
> will be Nov 2-6 in Santa Clara, California:
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/TPOverview.html#Future
> 
> The XML Core WG is tentatively planning to meet f2f 
> during that week.
> 
> ----
> 
> The AC Review of the XML Activity (that includes the
> charter for the XML Core WG) closes this Wednesday,
> and the responses to date have been meager.
> 
> Please urge your organizations's AC rep to respond
> to the call for review at:
> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/xmlactivity/
> 
> ----
> 
> 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
> 
> Allowing canonical equivalents to be treated as identical 
> directly in XML implies that an element's start tag and
> end tag could be character-for-character different.  This
> is not currently the case--such would be not well-formed
> and the input is therefore not XML--and the WG does not want 
> to make it the case.
> 
> We could add some "motherhood" notes saying that XML producers
> SHOULD produce normalized output.

No objections to adding such a motherhood note about
XML producers.

Glenn argues that it makes sense to add to XML 1.0 the
"should" normalization checking wording we have in 1.1.

Richard, Henry, and Konrad are generally ok with putting
the 1.1 wording into 1.0.

Norm doesn't exactly object but has concerns.

Henry wants to talk to others about doing something like
this in an erratum.

ACTION to Henry:  Discuss with others at the AC meeting
the possibility of adding to XML 1.0 via erratum the 
"should" normalization checking from XML 1.1.

ACTION to Paul:  Provide a status update to Addison.

-----

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.

ACTION to Henry:  Send email to the XML Core WG list
outlining the suggestion to define a serialization spec
including the rationale.

We note that XQuery/XSLT has a serialization spec.

Glenn points out there is a DOM serialization spec.

Konrad suggests one could add to XML an "envelope"
construct that allows one change encoding in the
middle of a document.

Richard argues that this just isn't XML, and Paul agrees.

We ran out of time here.

> 
> 3.  XML 1.0
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-errata
> 
> The XML 1.0 5th Edition Recommendation is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-xml-20081126/
> 
> 
> 4.  XML Test Suite.
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-test-suite
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Construct a test case for the XML test suite 
> issues raised by Frans Englich:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-testsuite/2007Mar/ 
> 
> 
> 5.  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 1.0 2nd Ed Errata document is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/xml-names-errata
> 
> The NS PE doc is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.html
> 
> Richard added some discussion at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2001/05/proposed-xml-names-errata.
> html#npe29
> The WG agreed with his direction and asked that he go forward with it.
> 
> ACTION to Richard:  Fill in a proposed resolution for NPE29.
> 
> 
> 6.  LEIRIs
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#leiri
> 
> The WG Note defining LEIRIs is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-leiri-20081103/
> 
> The following specs need to be revised to reference LEIRIs:
> XML 1.0 6th Edition
> XML 1.1 3rd Edition 
> XML Base 2nd Edition
> XLink 1.1 (First Edition)
> XInclude 3rd Edition 
> 
> 7.  xml:id
> 
> The xml:id Recommendation is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-xml-id-20050909/
> 
> John Cowan submitted a proposed erratum at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Jan/0009
> and the WG had Consensus to do as follows:
> 
>  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.
> 
> ACTION to Henry:  Update the Errata document at
> http://www.w3.org/2005/09/xml-id-errata
> 

ACTION to Henry continued.

> ACTION to Henry:  Think about the appropriateness of
> the same sentence in Appendix D.2.

ACTION to Henry continued.

> 
> 8.  XML Base 2nd Edition 2nd Rec
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-base
> 
> The XML Base 2nd Edition Recommendation is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-xmlbase-20090128/
> 
> 
> 9.  XLink 1.1.
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xlink1.1
> 
> The earlier XLink CR was published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-xlink11-20060328/ 
> 
> The XLink 1.1 LC was published at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-xlink11-20080331/
> 
> The LC review period ended 16 May 2008.
> 
> Norm has prepared a DoC at 
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2008/05/xlinklc/
> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Ensure the DoC is up to date.

ACTION to Norm continued.

> 
> ACTION to Norm:  Update XLink 1.1 to refer to the LEIRI note.

ACTION to Norm continued.

> 
> 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.
> 
> John asked whether we should have two schemas, one for
> each of our conformance levels.
> The notion was to have a schema for people who want to implement
> the basic level of conformance, so they only have simple links.
> For the DTD, which is just a sample, we just need a smaller
> subset. Likewise, the XSD should include only declarations 
> for the simple links.
> 
> ACTION to Henry, John:  Produce a basic level
> conformance XSD and RelaxNG schema for XLink.

ACTION to Henry, John continued.

> 
> Paul asks us to consider skipping CR and going directly to PR.
> 
> ACTION to Henry:  Review the history and make a recommendation
> as to whether we should skip CR and go directly to PR.

Done, we will aim for PR.

> 
> ACTION to Paul:  Draft a PR transition request.

ACTION to Paul continued.

> 
> 10.  XInclude 3rd Edition
> 
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude
> 
> XInclude 2nd Edition is at:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xinclude-20061115
> 
> See http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude for
> LEIRI-related changes for the 3rd Edition.
> 
> ACTION to Daniel: Produce a PER-ready draft of XInclude 3rd Ed
> with appropriate references to the IRI RFC for LEIRIs.
> 
> 
> 11.  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
> 
> ACTION to Henry:  Determine Saxon behavior in various erroneous cases
> and reply to Simon's email with results and suggested resolutions.

ACTION to Henry continued.

> Others are invited to reply to Simon's email with suggested 
> resolutions.

Those on the call weren't ready to discuss this further, 
so we will pick this up again next telcon.

> 
> [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/2009Feb/0020
>

Received on Wednesday, 11 March 2009 16:12:04 UTC