XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2010 July 19

The XML Core WG telcons are every other week.

Our next telcon will be 2010 July 28.
Henry gives regrets for July 28--proxy to Norm.


Status and open actions
=======================

TAG concern wrt 3023bis, +xml media types and fragids
-----------------------------------------------------
Henry sent email about this at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jun/0006

3023bis says that the +xml implies that the resource is suitable for 
processing by generic xml processors.  And it says that such xml
processors should handle fragment ids.  Specifically, handling the
fragment identifiers in an rdf+xml document is not something that a 
generic xml processor could do.

The TAG was leaning toward removing the statement from 3023bis that
says that fragid syntax and semantics is something that any generic
xml processor can handle in a +xml resource.

Norm and John (among others) weighed in; see the thread at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jun/thread.html#msg125
Norm's latest (as of July 18) is at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jul/0020


LEIRI
-----
See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Mar/0045
from Dan Connolly which references
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Mar/0037

At (among other places)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010May/0001
Larry Masinter explains the plan, to wit:

 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-00#section-1.3
 contains a definition in section 1.3 on "LEIRI proessing" which 
 should in fact be a definition of LEIRI:

  LEIRI:  This term was used in various XML specifications to
      refer to strings that, although not valid IRIs, were
      acceptable input to the processing rules in Section 7.1.

 where Section 7.1 of the same document is intended to contain an
 algorithm that will convert an LEIRI to an IRI.

 If that's adequate for XML Core to change its reference for LEIRI,
 fine, and if you need more, please say so.

A direct reference to Section 7.1 is
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-00#section-7.1

At last week's telcon the WG had consensus that, should the wording in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-iri-3987bis-00#section-7.1
ever end up in an RFC, it would be sufficient to allow
us to replace our LEIRI note with a reference to that wording.

Paul sent email to that effect to the TAG at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jul/0027
and
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jul/0024

This should close this issue (until 3987bis is an RFC).


Associating Stylesheets
-----------------------
See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss

We are working toward a PER for AssocSS 2nd Edition.

Our latest public draft is at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/04/xml-stylesheet/

The transition request for AssocSS is at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Apr/0034

We had an unsuccessful transition call last week.  See
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Apr/0057

The editors drafted new wording for Section 2 Conformance; see
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/05/xml-stylesheet/
http://www.w3.org/XML/2010/05/xml-stylesheet/diff.html

Paul sent email to Daniel Glazman and TimBL requesting comment at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010May/0012
and there was no response.

Liam talked to TimBL July 1 and sent some sketchy email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jul/0002
explaining what to do next.

At our telcon last week, Paul took an action to suggest some
change to our latest AssocSS draft, but at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jul/0028
he threw in the towel at least for the moment.

Received on Monday, 19 July 2010 14:17:32 UTC