- From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 11:24:45 -0500
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>
This posting relates to Issue-13 "What is the meaning of a document composed of content in mixed namespaces?" [1]. Here is a summary of the Q and A during the final session of the XML Processing Workshop that was held last year [2]. A. Discussion of bootstrap process of XML parsing, Namespace identification, XML:base calculation. 1. a) How many think XInclude should be bootstrap: 2+DanC in abstentia. b) How many think XInclude is an application choice: 17. Conclusion: Majority do not believe XInclude is part of a bootstrap process. 2. a) How many people would like schema validation to be bootstrap: 5. b) How many people want it to be an application process: many. Conclusion: Many do not believe the XML Schema is part of a bootstrap process. 3. What about XLink (actuate onload) Bootstrap: 0, Application: many Conclusion: No one believed that XLink (actuate on load) is part of a bootstrap process. B. Scope of a processing control language 1. a) full orchestration: 11 b) dependency/constrain language ([SZ] alternative forumulation: could have this on a state of data, exit/entry conditions): 17 c) simple linear flow language (like Signature):15 d) nothing: 3 Conclusion: Several different alternative forms of a control language are possible but some feel this is not something that should be standardized. 2. Processing control language used for (not exclusive) a) controlling processing (what must/should/is expected to happen)(make it happen): 19 b) documenting processing (what must should/is expected to happen): (in a spec, or carried in a doc): 15 c) document processing (what has happened) (in a log): 15 Conlusion: Several different objectives of the control language were identified. 3. Venue: if we do this work, where? (preference, pick 1) a) XML Core: 15 b) XML CG: 1 ([EM]: other coordination issues need to take place, dependencies with semantic web need to take place) c) Wait for XML protocols to do orchestration: 0. d) inter-WG task force: 5 e) new WG: 7 Conclusion: Any new work on a processing language work belongs in the XML Activity and certainly should be done by a newly chartered WG even if it was the XML Core WG. /paulc [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#mixedNamespaceMeaning-13 [2] http://www.w3.org/XML/2001/07/xmlpm-minutes.html Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 <mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com>
Received on Monday, 18 March 2002 11:24:49 UTC