- From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 11:51:50 -0400
- To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
Paul had forgotten to send the agenda for this week, so we had the call based on last telcon's agenda. Attendees --------- Glenn Norm Paul Henry John Daniel Jirka [7 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 10] Regrets ------- Liam Absent organizations -------------------- Innovimax Opera W3C (with regrets) No regrets given for Oct 20th. > 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. > > TPAC Nov 1-5 in Lyons, France > ----------------------------- > It now looks like there will be no official XML Core WG > meeting in Lyons. Those on the WG who are there are free > to meet informally, of course. If you are planning to > attend, be sure to register. > > Registration is now open; see http://www.w3.org/2010/11/TPAC/ > > 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. Noah sent email and > Norm has replied. See the thread at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jun/thread.html#msg125 > > Somewhat related, Henry sent email about XML fragid interpretation at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Jun/0025 > > Norm and John prefer to allow RDF (and others) to be an exception, > but the rule is that the default treatment is as specified in > XPointer Framework. > > Norm and John (among others) weighed in; see the thread at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jun/thread.html#msg125 > and > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jul/thread.html#msg0 > > Norm's latest (as of July 26, posted July 14) is at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jul/0020 > > Per Noah's email at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Aug/0003 > there will be no new status until September. > Discussion continues on www-tag. Norm and Henry are involved. > > 3. XML 1.0--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-errata > > > 4. XML Test Suite. > > See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-test-suite > > ACTION to Henry: 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 > http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.0 > and http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#ns1.1. > > > 6. LEIRIs--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#leiri > > > 7. xml:id--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-id > > > 8. XML Base 2nd Ed--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-base > > > 9. XLink 1.1--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xlink1.1 > > > 10. XInclude 3rd Ed--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude > > > 11. Associating Stylesheets. > > See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss > > AssocSS 2nd Ed is out for review as a PER; announcement: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2010JulSep/0050 > PER draft: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/PER-xml-stylesheet-20100909/ The PER review ends next Thursday, October 14. > > > 12. xml-model > > See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-schemas > > This has been published as a WG Note at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-xml-model-20100415/ > > At > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/0046 > Jirka indicated the completion of a successful SC34 ballot of > XML Model. The ISO process continues, but looks promising. It should soon go out for vote as DIS over the next 3-4 months. > We will plan to update our WG Note to reference the ISO spec > once it is officially available. > > > paul > > [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/2010Sep/0029 >
Received on Wednesday, 6 October 2010 15:52:53 UTC