Agenda for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 November 28

We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday,
November 28, from
          08:30-09:00 Pacific time aka
          11:30-12:00 Eastern time aka
          16:30-17:00 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

Per
https://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=18796
all expected members have rejoined except IBM.

ACTION to Glenn:  Have IBM's AC rep rejoin the WG and
re-nominate Glenn.


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

[Bug 17976] New: xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled 
explicitly
and
[Bug 14689] xml-stylesheet with type=text/xsl needs to be handled explicitly

A lot of bugzilla email has been exchanged on this issue.
It looks like we have agreement to address it, but only
in HTML.next.

This was discussed at the TPAC f2f.  The conclusion was
for Norm to pass on to the HTML5 WG suggested text for a
non-normative note to be included in the HTML5 1.0 spec
which he did:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14689#c35

Status:
We believe there was agreement to put some words into the spec.

ACTION to Norm:  Check with Robin that some words will be going
into the V1 spec.

MicroXML
--------
This is the W3C Community Group work on a subset of XML. See
http://www.w3.org/community/microxml/
and
http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/microxml/raw-file/tip/spec/microxml.html

Henry says that if they do decide to standardize it, we
should do it.  We do own that name.

John says the group is finished with its document, so it is
ready for us to consider what we will do with it.

We could publish it as a WG Note at any time.  If the document
is to become a Rec, that would have to go into our next charter
which is due this coming January.  If anything about MicroXML
is to go into our charter, we would want to review the wording
first, and Henry wants to be sure we are allowed, but not required
by the charter, to do anything with MicroXML.


Names that begin [Xx][Mm][Ll]
-----------------------------
This was discussed at the TPAC f2f.

Norm: proposed erratum

   s/in this or future versions of this specification/
    /in this or future specifications from the XML Core WG or its successors/

Henry: I'm perfectly happy to entertain a motion to remove this from
this specification and retain the "xml:" prefix only for elements and
attributes and "xml-" only for PI targets.

Norm: I'd prefer to make explicit that you *can* write names that
begin "xml", but doing so exposes you to being walked on in the
future. So don't do that.

Jirka: I can go either way, it's always been a restriction, users
should know better, but there are lots of documents that use it,
so we should adapt to common practice.

Jirka sent email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0009

ACTION to Norm:  Draft an erratum to "reserve" xml-* for PI targets
and delete the restriction that we lay claim to other names that
start with "xml".


xmlspec.xsl and diffspec.xsl
----------------------------
Paul sent email about this at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0014
with the following:

I gather that it's diffspec.xsl that should be used
for styling both the diff and non-diff version (with a
different setting of a global parameter).  If so, then
why do we have xmlspec.xsl as it stands now at all?

I still want to be able to have an xml-stylesheet PI
in the XML pointing to xmlspec.xsl, but then why don't
we replace xmlspec.xsl either with a copy of diffspec.xsl
with show.diff.markup=0 or with a two liner consisting of
show.diff.markup=0 and import diffspec.xsl?

I believe our current practice is to put a copy of both
xmlspec.xsl and diffspec.xsl into the same directory as
the XML and the two HTMLs.  Is this the best practice,
or should we be writing the xml-stylesheet PI with an
absolute path that points to the appropriate thing in
http://www.w3.org/2002/xmlspec/  ?

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.

Henry has been added as an editor and there is now a new draft,
draft-lilley-xml-mediatypes-00 at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lilley-xml-mediatypes-00

We now await this going through the IETF process.


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/

On 9 October 2012, we published our FPWD of XInclude 1.1 at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2012/10/WD-xinclude-11-20121009/

This was discussed at the TPAC f2f and there was agreement
on how to use MIME content types for the value of the parse
attribute.

ACTION: Norm to revise the XInclude 1.1 draft to use media types
for the parse attribute.


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