- From: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 10:02:54 -0500
- To: core <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5032519E.6070401@paulgrosso.name>
We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, August 22, 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. Charter renewal, need to rejoin ------------------------------- The new XML Core WG charter has been approved: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2012JulSep/0033 The call for participation has gone out and all WG members must have their AC rep rejoin the WG per https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2012JulSep/0034 Fall TPAC --------- There will be a TPAC meeting in Lyon, France in October/November: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Mar/0006 We have signed up to have a WG f2f there. Likely to attend: Norm, Liam, Henry, Jirka, Mohamed Not likely to attend: Glenn, Paul, John, Daniel xml-stylesheet and HTML5 ------------------------ 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. Henry's tests are at http://www.w3.org/XML/2011/11/ssTests/ You need to look at the README and README2 files there. The CSS2 spec says something about styling XML with CSS. Henry also notes http://www.w3.org/Style/styling-XML.en.html. ACTION to Henry: File a bug against the HTML5 spec saying that it should support styling XML with CSS. or ACTION to Henry: Confirm that some combination of: [Bug 17976] New: xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled explicitly and/or [Bug 14689] xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled explicitly complete this action. issues with the Polyglot draft ------------------------------ Is there anything left to track here, or can we remove these issues from our ongoing minutes? * Polyglot draft: BOM * Polyglot draft: xml:space and xml:base 3. 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/ 4. LEIRIs--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#leiri We have planned to issue the following spec editions referencing LEIRIs (and any outstanding errata): * XML 1.0 6th Edition (John to be editor) * XML 1.1 3rd Edition (John to be editor) * XInclude 3rd Edition (Paul to be editor) but all this is on hold awaiting resolution of IRIbis. 5. XInclude 1.1--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude On 2012 February 14, we published XInclude 1.1 Requirement and Use Cases http://www.w3.org/TR/xinclude-11-requirements/ We have started discussions at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Jun/thread#msg6 So far, we have provisional consensus as follows: * To add a fragid attribute. * Some wanted to deprecate xpointer, others didn't, though in either case it's less a technical issue than "political". * If both xpointer and fragid are specified, they should be identical. If not, some wanted to make this some kind of error, but not fatal and not something that triggered fallback. Others didn't feel it needed to be an error, but again, that's less a technical issue than "political". If both xpointer and fragid are specified, when parse=xml, the value of xpointer should be used; if parse is not xml, the value of fragid should be used. * We decided to change @parse to allow other values (besides xml and text). The effects of other values are implementation dependent, and unrecogized values are a "recoverable error" which causes fallback. * In XInclude 1.0, we define "resource errors" which cause fallback. Now that we have something other than a resource error that we want to cause fallback, we are going to change the terminology throughout the spec for errors that cause fallback (resource error -> recoverable error). Regarding what attributes get copied and how, we appear to lean toward copying only namespace qualified attributes. Regarding multiple rootedness, we had consensus to do all attribute copying to all top-level elements in the inclusion and let the application deal with multiple identical xml:id's. Regarding attribute conflicts, we had consensus that the xinclude value should win. What we're trying to do with XInclude here is just to allow enough information to be passed through to allow the application to do whatever fixup it feels it needs to do. Norm (as editor) will explain in the draft how what we are trying to do here with XInclude is to leave enough evidence in the post-included document to allow subsequent processing to be able to do whatever it wants. Henry says we could define a namespace that says copy me without any namespace. But he decided not to propose that seriously now. ACTION to Norm (as editor): Create a first draft XInclude 1.1. 6. XML Model Jirka reminded us that ISO published XML Model as an international standard. One can buy it at http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=54793 He said that the process is in order to try to allow the ISO version to be published for free. We will wait to see if it becomes freely available and then update our note to reference it. Jirka reported that the ISO process for making the ISO version free is a bit involved. WG1 has to recommend to SC34 that the spec be made public. This should happen at a June 2012 meeting. Then there is a 60 day ballot in SC34, then there is a 60 day ballot at the JTC1 level. If all goes well, ISO/IEC 19757-11 could be published at the ITTF page in late 2012. So it doesn't look like we'd be updating our XML Model WG Note before 2013. 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/2012Jun/0014
Received on Monday, 20 August 2012 15:03:39 UTC