Re: Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2011 November 30

Dear all,

Please accept my regrets

My proxy to the chair

Mohamed

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote:

>
> We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday,
> November 30, 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:
> Nov 30
> 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
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> There has been a fair number of emails on this in the past week.
> I'll be asking Henry for a summary status update during the call.
>
>
> 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 [or tried to] 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/0011
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
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 €