Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 June 13

Attendees
---------
Glenn
Paul
Norm
Liam
John  xx:38

[5 organizations (8 with proxies) present out of 9]

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


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


Our next telcon will be June 27.



>
> 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 is currently out for AC review.  Please get
> your AC rep to complete the review.  The call for review is at
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2012AprJun/0059
>


Please get your AC rep to send in a review of our charter.


>
> 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.
>
>
> issues with the Polyglot draft
> ------------------------------
> Henry sent email with various potential issues at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2011Nov/0037
>
> Polyglot draft: BOM
> -------------------
> We discussed the point about the spec recommending [P1] the use of the 
> UTF-8 BOM.
>
> [P1] http://dev.w3.org/html5/html-xhtml-author-guide/#character-encoding
>
> Henry filed an issue against Polyglot about the BOM:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012May/0000
>
> Someone pushed back saying that the BOM is more robust than
> the meta as a way of signaling UTF-8, so we shouldn't make
> meta the preferred way of doing it.  The proposed compromise
> is that neither would be listed as preferred.
>
> We're okay with that compromise.
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Accept the compromise.
>
>
> Polyglot draft: xml:space and xml:base
> --------------------------------------
> See the minutes at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Jan/0016
> for the discussion.
>
> Henry has drafted two issues regarding xml:space and xml:base in
> the Polyglot draft and HTML5 for WG review; see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012May/0001
>
> Norm thinks Henry's draft is fine.  Let's submit it and
> see what happens.
>
> ACTION to Henry:  Submit his comments on 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/
> summarizing the requirements and use cases for possible
> enhancements to XInclude addressing the issues:
>
> * @xpointer when parse="text"
> * copying attributes from the xinclude element to the root
>   included element
>
> We did get mostly positive feedback from Chris Lilley at:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-xinclude-comments/2012Feb/0000 
>
>
> Norm has posted something to the DocBook TC:
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook/201202/msg00001.html
>
> Norm nudged the DocBook mailing list again
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook/201204/msg00000.html
> and did publish this a few weeks ago:
> http://norman.walsh.name/2012/02/20/xinclude11
>
> Jirka gave some more feedback at
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook/201204/msg00002.html
> and also included it at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Apr/0002
>
> Daniel raised a concern about there possibly not being a root
> included element at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Apr/0010
> and Jirka responded at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Apr/0011
> We will need to consider this issue when we draft the spec.
>
> An updated charter is being reviewed by the AC.
> We don't expect any pushback, but in practice it will
> probably take a couple months before we really have a
> new charter.
>
> Meanwhile we could work on an XInclude 1.1 draft, but
> we couldn't publish it until we have our new charter.
>
> Norm is willing to continue to be editor of XInclude 1.1.
>
> We will start working on a draft over the next couple months
> by which time we should have a new charter and be able to
> publish.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Send out emails on the key XInclude 1.1 issues.
>

Norm started a thread at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Jun/0006

We had some good discussion on the question of the xpointer/textpoint/fragid
attribute on the telcon.

The consensus was:

* 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).


We did not discuss the issue of what attributes get copied and how.
There is already some email discussion--please continue in email.



>
> 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/2012May/0018
>
>