Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 August 22

Attendees
---------
Glenn
Norm
Paul
Henry
Liam
John

[6 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 9]

Regrets
-------
Daniel, proxy to the chair

Absent organizations
--------------------
Innovimax
Daniel Veillard (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Jirka Kosek



> 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.
>
> 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
>
>


Be sure to rejoin.


> 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.
>


We will leave this on our agenda for now.


>
> 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
>

We are waiting for confirmation that we are satisfied,
so we will remove this from our agenda for now.



>
> 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.
>

ACTION to Norm continued.


>
> 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
>
>