Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2013 November 27

Attendees
---------
Loren
Norm
David
Henry
Paul
John

[6 organizations (9 with proxies) present out of 10]

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

Absent organizations
--------------------
Innovimax (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Red Hat (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Univ of Econ, Prague (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
W3C (with regrets)


Our next telcon on December 11 will be the last telcon of the year.
After that, our subsequent telcon will be January 8.

Henry gives regrets for January 8.


> 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.
>
> Our next telcon on December 11 will be the last telcon of the year.
> After that, our subsequent telcon will be January 8.
>
>
> Submitting XML Schema 1.1 to ISO
> --------------------------------
> Liam raised the question of whether the W3C should submit
> XML Schema 1.1 as an ISO standard; some discussion ensued:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Oct/thread#msg28
> and we had more discussion on our last two telcons.
>
> ACTION to David and Loren: Discuss the issues with taking
> XML Schema (1.0 and 1.1) to ISO and recommend a path.
>

David, Loren, Jirka met (and later talked to Liam).  They decided
we should first publish XML Schema 1.1 2E (with approved errata).

After that, we would send XML Schema 1.1 2E (only) to ISO.

Loren has offered to do the editorial duties, and David
talked to CMSMCQ about getting some more help in the details.

The group didn't think it was necessary to publish 1.0 since
1.1 should suffice.  Henry concurs.

Henry might be able to help with the tool chain needed to
publish XML Schema 1.1.

The WG has consensus to go with the above plan.

>
> 3.  XML Test Suite.
>
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-test-suite
>
>
> 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.  XML Media types (3023bis)
>
> The latest (diff marked) draft (dated November 4, 2013 ) is at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2012/10/3023bis/draft-ietf-appsawg-xml-mediatypes-04_diff.html
>
> Comments and resolutions at
> http://www.w3.org/XML/2012/10/3023bis/02-comments.html
>
> Please note in particular that a significant addition has been made to
> section 3.6 [1], to address the fact that the XML spec. itself defers
> to this spec. to define the precedence of charset parameter [in the
> http header], BOM and XML encoding declaration [both in the document].
>
> John reviewed it and had no comments.
>
> Paul drafted a message to IETF endorsing 3023-bis -04.
> Henry approved it, and Paul sent it to the IETF; see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Nov/0011
> for the copy in our archive and
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg10849.html
> for the IETF copy.
>

Henry received more comments, so he continues to edit the document.

At
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Nov/0015
Henry raised the question of having 3023bis referencing other specs.

Should 3023bis reference such other specs as Namespaces, Associating
Stylesheets, xml:id, xml:base, and perhaps some others of the XML Core
specs?

ACTION to Henry:  Draft (of perhaps an appendix) some wording to add
to 3023bis referencing other specs.

> In related email, John did comment on Henry's "who's on top":
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Nov/0005
>
>

This issue is mostly settled.  Henry will try to add a brief
discussion of UTF-32.  John recommends we say one "should not
use UTF-32 in interchange".


> 6.  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/
>
> On 15 January 2013, we published our (first) Last Call of
> XInclude 1.1 at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-xinclude-11-20130115/
> and Paul sent the transition announcement at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Jan/0012
> (also cc-ing the chairs mailing list).
> On 2013 October 8, we published the XInclude 1.1 CR at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/CR-xinclude-11-20131008/
>
> Norm reports that Michael Kay's code just accesses Xerces code,
> so Norm might have to work with Xerces.
>
> DV reports that he is busy and so cannot commit to a deadline
> for adding XInclude 1.1 support to libxml.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Continue to work toward getting XInclude 1.1
> implementations and document them in our implementation report.
>

ACTION to Norm continued.


> 7. MicroXML
>
> MicroXML is not in our new charter, but we can discuss it.
> We will leave this as an ongoing item in our standing agenda.
>
>
> 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/2013Nov/0007
>
>