Minutes for XML Core WG telcon of 2016 April 27

Attendees
---------
Norm
Paul
David
Henry
John
Jirka

[6 organizations (7 with proxies) present out of 8]

Regrets
-------
Mohamed, proxy to the chair

Absent organizations
--------------------
Innovimax (with regrets, proxy to the chair)
W3C

Our next telcon is scheduled for May 11.
Norm sends regrets.


> 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. (None.)
>
>
> 3. XInclude 1.1--see http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#xinclude
>
> On 2015 June 30, we published our second XInclude 1.1 CR at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/CR-xinclude-11-20150630/
> Norm has an implementation in XML Calabash.
> He has also implemented XInclude 1.1 in MarkLogic.
>
> Jirka reports that there is another XInclude 1.1 implementation
> in XML Mind XML Editor.  See:
> http://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/changes.html#v6.2.0
> Norm has made some updates to the test suite per
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Mar/thread#msg4
>
> Norm has augmented the test suite some more:
> https://github.com/w3c/xinclude/tree/testsuite11
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Send email about the test suite to those who
> should be using it to test their implementations.
>
> 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
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Add another test case to the test suite per
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2014Apr/0000
>
> ACTION to Jirka:  Run the XML Mind XML Editor through the new test suite.
>
> ACTION to Norm: (Continue to) run the test suite through Calabash and 
> MarkLogic.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Update the implementation report.


Above ACTIONs continued.


> ---
>
> In working on the test suite and spec, Norm sent several emails
> that require WG input.  I have made a comment on the first two
> already, and I am taking the chair's prerogative to assign:
>
> ACTION to Henry, John: Respond to Norms's emails on XInclude, to wit:
>
> * Proposed changes to XInlude test suite
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/thread.html#msg7

Agreement with Norm's first proposed changes (about newlines)
and to leave the second test (it should fail).

>
> * Clarify that fragid support is optional when parse=text
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/thread.html#msg8

Henry made a suggestion at
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/0022.

Norm accepted Henry's suggestion.

>
> * Language fixup and the expected results of test eduni-3
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/thread.html#msg13

Norm questions why xml:lang="en-gb" is expected on line 14
because fixup isn't required.

It turns out that Norm may have counted things wrong, or
perhaps his implementation of language fixup is wrong.

He will look again at things and tweak the test to be
clearer (since two tests have "Hello").

>
> * Rework XInclude tests to use xml:id attributes?
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/thread.html#msg14

Norm points out many implementations do not handle id attributes
as ids because they do not process the DTD, so he proposes that
we change all the ids--except one--in the test suite to xml:id
so that they work for such implementations.

He will leave one with id which will fail in such implementations.

The WG endorses that change.

>
> ---
>
> Paul raised the question of whether the spec requires
> the support for RFC 5147. It isn't mentioned under
> Application Conformance, but the description of fragid,
> it says "for text processing, [the fragid value] is
> interpreted as a [IETF RFC 5147] fragment identifier"
> and it doesn't discuss what to do if an implementation
> doesn't support that.
>
> Norm suggests that we can't force implementations to
> support it and that we should clarify the spec to say
> that lack of support for fragid when parse=text
> should be a recoverable error.
>
> Henry and Paul agree with that suggestion.
>
> ACTION to Norm:  Update the spec to clarify that lack
> of support for fragid when parse=text should be a
> recoverable error.

Done.

The latest (diff version of the) spec is available at:

https://ndw.github.io/xinclude/xinclude/xinclude11/head/diffcr.html


>
>
> paul
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core
> [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/Core#tasks
> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Apr/0004
>
>
>