- From: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>
- Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 09:55:06 -0500
- To: core <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <56E8224A.7010304@paulgrosso.name>
The XML Core WG telcons are scheduled for every other week. Our next telcon was scheduled for this Wednesday, March 16, but given we have no progress to discuss, we are CANCELLING this week's telcon. Our next telcon is scheduled for March 30. Status and open actions ======================= XInclude 1.1 ------------ 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 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: Update the implementation report and test suite. --- Henry pointed out that Section 4.4 references RFC 3023 which has been superseded by RFC 7303. The 7303 rules for determining encoding of XML documents are slightly different from the 3023 ones. Henry reviewed the consequences to the spec of changing 3023 to 7303 and sent email with suggested rewording at https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xml-core-wg/2016Feb/0003 ACTION to Norm: Net editorial tweaking, make this wording change to the latest XInclude 1.1 draft. Also, replace the reference to 3023 with one to 7303. --- 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, 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.
Received on Tuesday, 15 March 2016 15:00:49 UTC