Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2011 November 16

Attendees
---------
 Norm
 Paul 
 Henry
 Liam
 Jirka

[5 organizations (6 with proxies) present out of 9]

Regrets
-------
Daniel
John

Absent organizations
--------------------
IBM
Innovimax
Daniel Veillard (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
John Cowan  (with regrets)

Our next telcon is November 30.


> 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.

> 
> The minutes from the TPAC f2f are at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0004

Accepted.

> 
> 2. Miscellaneous administrivia and document reviews.
> 
> Schedule of telcons
> -------------------
> We plan to have telcons on:
> Nov 30
> Dec 14
> Jan 11 - Norm gives probable regrets
> 
> 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 some more work to do for Hickson.

ACTION to Henry:  Do some more fiddling with reporting the issue.

> 
> HT: I have an *xhtml* doc with an xml-stylesheet PI with
type=text/xsl.
> Does the HTML5 specs cover this case?
> 
> ACTION to Henry: Consider asking the above question of the HTML5 WG
> after doing some research to determine what does currently happen.

ACTION to Henry:  continued.

> 
> HT: Section 5.5.3 doesn't appear to distinguish between xhtml and
> non-xhtml xml documents.  The spec does not make it obvious what
> should happen for non-xhtml xml documents.
> 
> ACTION to Henry:  Think about the above statement and determine
> if we need to file a bug report or ask a question about it.
> 

ACTION to Henry:  continued.

> 
> 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.

This seemed like overkill and/or undesirable/impractical to most of us.

> 
> 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 will continue this discussion in the WG.

Yes, we aren't quite ready to start drafting Xinclude 1.1,
but discussion will continue.

Our current charter includes as a deliverable XInclude 3rd Edition,
but what we are discussing here would have to be an XInclude 1.1,
and that isn't explicitly included in our charter, though we are
chartered "to consider comments on...XInclude".

ACTION to Liam:  Discuss with whomever appropriate in W3M as to
whether we can start work on XInclude 1.1 under our present charter,
and, if not, what we should do if we wanted to work on XInclude 1.1.

> 
> 3023-bis
> --------
> Chris Lilley sent email that Paul forwarded at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0007
> 
> I'll be asking Henry what he makes of this.

Chris believes the issues with the xml declaration and charset/encoding
have been resolved.  (For things delivered by http, the xml declaration
takes precedence.)

The TAG, Chris, and Henry still have work to do to arrive at a
unified position wrt fragment identifiers.  The expectation is that
we will say that xpointer type processing on xml resources will be
the norm except for certain exceptions such as RDF.  It will not be
an error for a generic processor to find a fragment identifier that
is not an xpointer.

It is still not clear when we might see 3023-bis become an RFC.

> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> We will continue this discussion in the WG.

We did not get to discuss this on today's telcon.

ACTION to Paul:  Try to kick off an email discussion of this.

> 
> 
> 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/2011Oct/0025
>

Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 17:17:35 UTC