Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2012 November 28

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


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

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

Absent organizations
--------------------
IBM
W3C (with regrets)
Innovimax (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Red Hat (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Jirka Kosek (with regrets)


Our next telcon is December 12.  Regrets from Henry.

Note, the telcon of December 12 will be the last telcon of the
year, as we are cancelling the telcon on December 26.  After the
telcon of December 12, the next telcon will be 2013 January 9.



> 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).
>

Last meetings minutes are at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0011

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
>
> 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.


New charter
-----------
Our current charter expires in January.

Liam has started a draft charter at
http://www.w3.org/XML/2013/xml-core-charter.html

Paul already posted some (mostly editorial) comments at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0017

John sent some suggested wording about MicroXML at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0019

Liam implemented Paul's suggestions, then Paul sent more email at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0023

During the telcon, we had consensus agreement with Paul's latest
suggestions (which included using John's wording).

ACTION to Liam:  Implement Paul's suggestions at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0023
in the next version of the draft new charter.


>
>
> 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.

Norm found some wording in http://htmlwg.org/cr/html/ as reported at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2012Nov/0024

It wasn't clear to us that this was satisfactory.

ACTION to Norm:  Recheck with Robin about HTML5 and xml-stylesheet.

---

Henry points out that there is now something in the WhatWG spec
about how to format XML in the absence of any style.  See
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15180

>
> 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".


ACTION to Norm continued.


>
>
> 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/  ?

ACTION to Norm:  Come up with (and implement) a plan to
reorganize xmlspec.xsl and diffspec.xsl to "do the right
thing."

Norm suggests the best practice should remain that we put
copies into the document directory.

On the contrary, Henry suggests we should point to the
top level stylesheets rather than copies in the document
directory (or at least have just a local stub that imports
the top level ones).  He notes that the top level ones are
dated, so we don't actually change them, we create new ones.

ACTION to Paul:  Send email to Norm about a few details.


>
> 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.

ACTION to Norm continued.


>
> 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/2012Nov/0011
>
>