Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 July 25

Attendees
---------
Paul
Norm
John

[3 organizations (4 with proxies) present out of 9]

Regrets
-------
Henry
Liam
Jirka
Daniel, proxy to the chair
Mohamed


Absent organizations
--------------------
IBM
Innovimax (with regrets)
Univ of Edinburgh (with regrets)
W3C (with regrets)
Daniel Veillard (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Jirka Kosek (with regrets)


We are cancelling the telcon of August 8 [for which Henry and Paul
must give regrets and Norm gives probably regrets], so the next
telcon after this week's one will be August 22.


>
> 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.
>
> XML Core WG Charter
> -------------------
> The amended XML Core WG charter that allows us to work on
> XInclude 1.1 was out for AC review.
>
> ACTION to Liam:  Give an update on the XML Core WG charter update.


ACTION to Liam continued.


>
>
> 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.


ACTION(s) to Henry continued.


>
>
> 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.


ACTION to Norm continued.  He will try to have a draft ready by
the August 22 telcon.


>
>
> 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
>
>