Re: XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2009 October 12

Dear,

For the next telcon (in 8 days), I wanted to add an item on ISO
DSDL-Part 11 (a.k.a <?xml-model) and explain you what we discussed at
Seatle

Regards,

Mohamed

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote:
>
> The XML Core WG telcons are every other week.
>
> Our next telcon will be October 21.
>
> *********************************************************************
>
> Unless you'll be calling in from Australia, South America, or several
> other places not usually the home base of anyone on this WG, the locale
> for all the usual WG members will still be observing daylight time, so
> our telcon on October 21 will remain at the usual local time for all
> WG members.
>
> The usual time for our subsequent call would be November 4 which is
> during the Technical Plenary week and will therefore be cancelled.
> REGISTER NOW if you plan to attend the f2f at the Technical Plenary.
> (FWIW, UK/Europe shifts back to standard time on October 25 and
> North America on November 1.)
>
> Our next call after that of October 21 will be that of November 18
> at which point all of the usual WG members' locales will be observing
> Standard time, so our telcon will remain at the usual local time for
> all WG members.
>
> *********************************************************************
>
> Status and open actions
> =======================
>
> SC 34/WG 1 use of xml-model PI
> ------------------------------
> We had responded to an SC 34/WG1 request to be able to use xml-model
> for a PI target.  Our response is at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009May/0011
>
> We received a response at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/0001
> to which Paul replied at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/0021
>
> Our next action is to inform SC 34/WG1 when we have a public draft
> of our Associating Stylesheets 2nd Edition.
>
> 3023-bis
> --------
> A new draft of 3023-bis is at
> http://www.w3.org/2006/02/son-of-3023/draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml-04.ht
> ml
>
> ACTION to Henry, Francois:  Review this 3023-bis draft.
>
>
> 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
>
> NS 1.0 3rd Ed PER is at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/PER-xml-names-20090806/
> and the review was successful.  The WG approved publication as a Rec.
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Submit a transition/publication request for
> NS 1.0 2nd Ed to go to Rec.
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> 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.
>
> The latest editor's draft (of the PR) is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/
> and a diff-with-the-last-CR draft is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/Overview-diff.html
>
> Henry finds the DTD/RelaxNG/XSD fragments throughout the spec unhelpful
> and would like to remove them (leaving them only in the appendices).
> Henry specifically referenced the example immediately preceding 5.3.
> But this was in the CR, so we will probably leave it, but we will
> remove the default for xlink:type.
>
> Henry has updated the DTDs and sent things to Norm.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Update the draft with the correct DTD, XSD, and RNC.
>
> 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
>
> Norm created an updated IR at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/xmlcore/xlink11/ir.html
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Adding a mention of the test suite at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2006/03/xlink11-tests to the IR.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Create a diff between 1.0 and the 1.1 PR ready draft.
>
>
> 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
>
> The latest issues document with CONSENSUS resoltions is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/06/assocss-issues.htm
>
> The latest editor's draft of AssocSS 1.0 2nd Edition is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2009/09/xml-stylesheet.html
>
> We had some discussion at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Sep/thread.ht
> ml#msg24
> and
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2009Oct/thread.ht
> ml#msg14
>
> ACTION to Simon, Henry:  Produce another draft reflecting
> resolutions to various WG comments.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €

Received on Tuesday, 13 October 2009 16:47:41 UTC