Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2014 January 22

Attendees
---------
Norm
Paul
Jirka
Henry xx:11
David

[5 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 10]

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


Absent organizations
--------------------
Greatlinkup (with regrets)
Innovimax (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
Red Hat (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
W3C (with regrets)
John Cowan


Our next telcon is February 5.


> 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 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.
>

ACTION to John continued.

-----

Also the comment about documents with an "empty DTD":
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Jan/thread#msg8
and
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2014JanMar/

Henry suggests we could probably make the XML spec clearer here;
see also his comments at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2014JanMar/0004

ACTION to Paul:  Draft a response and post it to the XML Core
mailing list.  If no objections within a couple days, post to
the commentor and xml-editor list.


>
> 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.
>

There was some discussion with Michael in late 2013;
nothing since.

ACTION to Loren and David continued.

>
> 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
>  and it SHOULDN'T have any BOM. For compatibility with existing
>  implementations, the following processing rules are given....
>
> 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.
>
> Henry replies that (and this could/should be made clearer)
> "XML producers" _means_ "XML producers of entities for
> delivery by MIME-compliant means".
>

ACTION to Henry:  Edit 3023bis to suggest that XML producers
of entities for delivery by MIME-compliant means SHOULD always
produce BOM-less UTF-8.


>
> 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
>
>
>
>