Re: [Minutes] 6-7 Feb 2003 TAG ftf meeting

On Tue, 2003-02-11 at 11:50, Paul Grosso wrote:
> [Yes, this is really about the minutes!]

See my comments below.

> At 20:35 2003 02 10 -0500, Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
> >[1]
> >-- 
> In [1], there is a section that reads as follows:
>  xmlIDSemantics-32 : How should the problem of identifying ID semantics
>  in XML languages be addressed in the absence of a DTD?
>  Issues fragmentInXML-28 and xmlIDSemantics-32
>  [Ian] 
>      TB: I think they are related. If you are solving the ID problem,
>      you need to also decide how to solve the frag id problem.
>      PC: I am willing to be owner of 32
>  On xmlProfiles-29 
>      PC: Henry Thompson asks what the TAG wants to happen. They are looking
>      for more details than we have given them. 
>      DC: Liam Quin has the ball on this; he has accepted this. 
> The link underneath "fragmentInXML-28" is to 

> So I'm wondering if the text or the link is wrong.  

Yes, should be to fragmentInXML-28 (per the IRC log).

> As written,
> it looks like TB is saying fragmentInXML-28 and xmlIDSemantics-32
> are related, but I'm guessing the text is wrong and he means to
> be saying that xmlProfiles-29 and xmlIDSemantics-32 are related
> (to which I disagree, but I'm more interested in getting the minutes
> accurate at this point).

I've aligned the minutes with the IRC log. I leave it to TBL to say
whether he was referring to issue 28 or 29.

 _ Ian

Ian Jacobs (
Tel:                     +1 718 260-9447

Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 12:10:19 UTC