Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2010 September 22

Attendees
---------
 Glenn 
 Norm
 Paul 
 Henry
 John 
 Daniel

[6 organizations (6 with proxies) present out of 10]

Regrets
-------
Simon
Liam
Mohamed
Jirka

Absent organizations
--------------------
Innovimax (with regrets)
Opera (with regrets)
W3C (with regrets)
Jirka Kosek (with regrets)

Liam sends regrets for Oct 6th.


> 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.
> 

The TAG is continuing to discuss this in email, but we're
not sure exactly where the discussion stands or is going.


> 
> 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
> 
> Mohamed asked if xlink should point to xlink11; see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2010Aug/0003
> 
> The XLink 1.0 Recommendation at http://www.w3.org/TR/xlink/
> now has had a reference to XLink 1.1 added.
> 
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> We will plan to update our WG Note to reference the ISO spec
> once it is officially available.

We should update the Note's reference to AssocSS when
the latter becomes a Rec.

> 
> 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/0017
>

Received on Wednesday, 22 September 2010 15:46:50 UTC