- From: Loren Cahlander <loren.cahlander@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 19:00:22 -0400
- To: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
- Cc: core <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <54E9082A-D908-486E-8BB6-5F0599F7A67B@gmail.com>
Loren Cahlander Principal GreatLinkUp, LLC cahlander@greatlinkup.com loren.cahlander@gmail.com +1-651-747-6910 On Oct 13, 2014, at 11:12 AM, Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name> wrote: > We have an XML Core WG phone call scheduled for Wednesday, > October 15, from > 08:30-09:00 Pacific time aka > 11:30-12:00 Eastern time aka > 15:30-16:00 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. > > 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 and Henry: Review and comment on the above two comments > on the discussion of BOMs in section 4.3.3 of the XML spec. > > ---- > > 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 > > Paul sent the WG response at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2014JanMar/0005 > and there was more back from the commentor at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2014JanMar/ > > ACTION to Henry: Read the post-February 6 email at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-editor/2014JanMar/ > and let us know what you think we should do. > > > 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 after checking with Michael, he found > https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.errata-2012.html > which shows 8 errata items whereas bugzilla shows only 3. > > We discussed > https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2004/06/xmlschema-1/structures.errata-2012.html > > Henry figures we can just publish this document. > > Loren believes the latest document includes everything, > so the next step is to push it through the tool chain, > but that make take help from Henry or Michael. Loren > will try to contact Michael again. I found the following: http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#rec-edited http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#editorial-change > > We will need a diff (or list of changes) and a test suite. > Loren says the diff is already available. > > We need to see if any of the changes are normative. > It appears that none of the changes require a chance > in the test suite. > > David has produced a table outlining his thoughts on the > normativity of the various changes at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Oct/0003 > though the formatting there doesn't appear to work well. > You can view the table better at > https://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2014/xschema11.html > > ACTION to the WG: Review David's table so that we can > discuss this at our next telcon. > > ACTION to Loren: Check that he can run the build. > > Potential Erratum to Namespaces > ------------------------------- > CMSMcQ raised a potential erratum against Namespaces at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-names-editor/2014Sep/0000 > with WG discussion started at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Sep/0019 > > He says that our latest wording in the definition of 'namespace name' > (section 2.1) appears to say that an element with no namespace binding > in scope is in no namespace as opposed to saying its namespace is > unknown (thereby leaving the possibility that its namespace > information may be determined by some other methods). > > Norm, Paul, and Henry posted some thoughts on this, and none > of us feel that the current wording is necessarily bad enough > to be worth any change. In particular, Norm doesn't agree with > what Michael thinks should be the case. Henry points out that > HTML5 does "make use of" defining namespaces without the > namespace spec mechanism. > > Henry had some more (private) exchanges with Michael, and > Henry will summarize the discussion for the WG. > > ACTION to Henry: Summarize and provide current status of > the discussion of this namespace potential erratum. > > > 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. 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. > > Note also the desire for another test case for the XInclude test suite per > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Apr/0000 > Norm may see if he knows anyone still working on Xerces. > > Norm is planning to write a SAX filter to implement XInclude 1.1. > He believes this will lead to a way for using XInclude 1.1 with > Saxon's XSLT processor and most any other Java based tool. > > Norm raised an issue at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Sep/0004 > pointing out a problem copying the xml:base attribute > when the xi:xinclude element itself has an xml:base attribute. > After WG discussion, we decided we need to be clearer in general > about how xml:id, xml:lang, and xml:base are handled when they occur > on the xi:include element including how they get their semantics. > > ACTION to Norm: Write a proposal for how to address this problem. > > 6. 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/2014Oct/0001 > > > > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2014 23:00:51 UTC