- From: Innovimax W3C <innovimax+w3c@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:41:31 +0100
- To: "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>
- Cc: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAAK2GfHFZhY7=pe-hfb86gVBvpM+RntEH++5O2wy8Hf0h_dchw@mail.gmail.com>
Dear all, Again regrets Proxy to the chair All the best Mohamed On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote: > > We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, > December 14, from > 08:30-09:00 Pacific time aka > 11:30-12:00 Eastern time aka > 15:30-16:00 UTC > 16:30-17:00 in Ireland and the UK > 17:30-18:00 in middle (most of) Europe > on the Zakim W3C Bridge, +1 617 761 6200, passcode 9652#. > We also use IRC channel #xmlcore on irc.w3.org:6665 . > > See the XML Core group page [1] for pointers to current documents > and other information. If you have additions to the agenda, please > email them to the WG list before the start of the telcon. > > Please also review our group page's task list [2] for accuracy and > completeness and be prepared to amend if necessary and accept it > at the beginning of the call. > > > Agenda > ====== > 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). > > > 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews. > > Schedule of telcons > ------------------- > We plan to have telcons on: > Dec 14 > Jan 11 > > No telcon on December 28. > > > xml-stylesheet and HTML5 > ------------------------ > Henry and Paul met with Anne van Kesteren at the TPAC f2f > (see minutes). > > Henry took an action to file a bug about xml-stylesheet > handling. Done: > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14689 > > Henry has done a lot more testing and filing of results to date. > > One edge issue is having a spec for what browsers should do when an > XML document has a SS PI pointing to a CSS stylesheet. > > Henry's tests indicate most browsers handle this pretty well, but > there is nothing in the HTML5 spec about this. Do we want something > in there about this? > > Liam sent pointers to examples of support for styling XML with CSS at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Dec/0003 > > HT thinks the status quo is generally correct, we just need to > make sure it is spec-ed properly in the HTML5 spec. > > Henry's tests are at > http://www.w3.org/XML/2011/11/ssTests/ > You need to look at the README and README2 files there. > > > issues with the Polyglot draft > ------------------------------ > Henry sent email with various potential issues at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0037 > > We should discuss each point and decide what we think. > > > Extending XInclude > ------------------ > Henry, Paul, Liam, Murray discussed this at the f2f (see minutes). > > Those present generally liked the idea of extending xinclude to copy > attributes on the xinclude element down to the root included element, > but we didn't agree on details. > > Some issues include: > > 1. exactly what attributes to copy? Henry and Liam preferred to > copy un-prefixed attributes (except those in the xinclude spec) too. > > Norm worries what this would mean if we add another attribute > in the XInclude spec? > > Henry wants to be able to have unprefixed attributes copied > onto the root included element. > > Henry: we could add a new "copy me without prefix" namespace > to xinclude. > > Norm doesn't need that, but could live with it. > > 2. what to do about attribute conflict (error or one or the other > wins). > > 3. whether we should "log" additions (e.g., via an attribute that > says what attributes were added). > > At first, we didn't think this was much of a concern, but then we > realized perhaps it was something worth considering. > > 4. whether we should have some way for targets to say whether they > can be xincluded and/or, when included, have attributes added. > > We had a discussion about xinclude being like img/@src rather than > a/@href in that xincluding things is basically "stealing" them. > > Yes, it's worth thinking about this a bit, but it seems like > this issue exists already elsewhere, and it may not make sense > to worry about this in XInclude. > > We aren't quite ready to start drafting Xinclude 1.1, > but discussion will continue. > > Liam tells us that it's okay to work on requirements for an > XInclude 1.1, but before publishing a FPWD, we'll need a charter > revision. He doesn't anticipate any problems, provided there's > a realistic schedule for getting to Rec. > > > 3. XML 1.0--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-errata > > We are creating an XML 1.0 6th Edition and XML 1.1 3rd (or > perhaps 6th) Edition. > > ACTION to John: Update the XML sources for XML 1.0 and 1.1 > to reflect any errata and the LEIRI reference. > > On hold awaiting resolution of IRIbis. > > > 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 > > We had planned to issue the following spec editions referencing LEIRIs: > > * XML 1.0 6th Edition > * XML 1.1 3rd Edition > * XInclude 3rd Edition > > We continue to wait to see what might happen with IRIbis. > > > 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 > > We are creating an XInclude 3rd Edition. > > ACTION to Paul: Update the XML sources for Xinclude to reflect > any errata and the LEIRI reference. > > On hold awaiting resolution of IRIbis. > > XInclude @xpointer when parse="text" > ------------------------------------ > Henry, Paul, Liam, Murray discussed this at the f2f (see minutes). > > Previous email discussion at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Oct/thread.ht > ml#msg46 > > We seem to have three choices: > > 1. allow use of the @xpointer attribute when parse=text > 2. add a new "@textptr" attribute to use when parse=text > 3. add a new "@fragid" attribute to use in all cases and possibly > deprecate the @xpointer attribute > > The assembled group was generally positive about working on a solution > of some sort. It felt like the "right" solution if we could time-travel > backwards would be #3, the easiest spec change was to #2, though some > of us felt that #1 was the best choice at the present. > > Paul restarted the email discussion at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/thread.ht > ml#msg12 > > > 11. Associating Stylesheets. > > See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-ss > > AssocSS 2nd Ed is now a Recommendation at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-xml-stylesheet-20101028/ > > > 12. xml-model > > See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#assoc-schemas > > The Second Edition has been published as a WG Note at > http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/NOTE-xml-model-20110811/ > > > 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/2011Nov/0040 > > > > > > > > > > > -- 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 Wednesday, 14 December 2011 09:42:05 UTC