Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2014 January 8

Attendees
---------
Norm
Liam xx:09
Loren
Paul
John
Jirka

[6 organizations (8 with proxies) present out of 10]

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


Absent organizations
--------------------
Innovimax (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Red Hat (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Univ of Edinburgh (with regrets)
NACS (with regrets)


Our next telcon is January 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.

At this time, University of Economics, Prague is no longer
a W3C member.  Jirka is trying to figure out his options,
and he will be working with Liam on this.


>
> Submitting XML Schema 1.1 to ISO
> --------------------------------
> See also
> https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-schema
>
> We have decided we will 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.
> It looks like there are 3 bugs for Structures, none for Datatypes,
> but check with Michael.
>
> Henry might be able to help with the tool chain needed to
> publish XML Schema 1.1.
>
> ACTION to Loren and David: Produce a publication-ready version
> of XML Schema 1.1 2E incorporating the approved errata.
>

ACTION to Loren and David continued.


>
> XML Potential Errata
> --------------------
> Comment that "or by the Byte Order Mark" is lacking in section 4.3.3:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2013OctDec/0002
>
> Comment that an entity cannot "begin" with a BOM as suggested in 
> section 4.3.3:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2013OctDec/0003
>
>

ACTION to John:  Review and comment on the above two comments
on the discussion of BOMs in section 4.3.3 of the XML spec.


> 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)
>
> See also http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xml-media
>
> Latest IETF draft is -06 dated December 5 at
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-appsawg-xml-mediatypes-06.html
>
> Subsequently, there was further discussion of Appendix B and how
> to reference it; see
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2013Nov/thread#msg21
>
> ACTION to Henry: Continue to edit 3023bis.

Henry indicates the IETF review has shown considerable
interest in adding something along the following lines:

  Going forward, XML producers SHOULD use UTF-8 exclusively,
  without any BOM. For compatibility with existing
  implementations, the following processing rules are given.

What do we think about that?

John is concerned that this is put on *producers* rather
than transmitters.  He says it's perfectly reasonable for
producers to produce other encodings locally.  For example,
there are many pages produced in Windows encodings.

Paul wonders exactly how to parse Henry's statement above.
Is it saying "if you use UTF-8, you SHOULDN'T have a BOM"
or "you SHOULD use UTF-8 and it SHOULDN'T have a BOM."

We will continue this discussion in email.

>
>
> 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/2013Dec/0002
>
>
>
>