IRC log of sml on 2008-11-20
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 18:59:58 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sml
- 18:59:58 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-irc
- 19:00:22 [johnarwe_]
- johnarwe_ has joined #sml
- 19:00:39 [Kumar]
- Kumar has joined #sml
- 19:00:42 [Sandy]
- meeting: W3C SML Teleconference of 2008-11-20
- 19:00:47 [Sandy]
- scribenick: Sandy
- 19:00:54 [Sandy]
- scribe: Sandy Gao
- 19:01:14 [Zakim]
- XML_SMLWG()2:00PM has now started
- 19:01:15 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 19:01:19 [Sandy]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Nov/0038.html
- 19:01:44 [Zakim]
- +Sandy
- 19:01:46 [Zakim]
- -Sandy
- 19:01:46 [Zakim]
- +Sandy
- 19:02:05 [Zakim]
- +JohnArwe
- 19:02:21 [johnarwe_]
- MSM sent regrets, is on a plane
- 19:02:25 [Sandy]
- chair: John Arwe
- 19:04:27 [Zakim]
- +Kumar
- 19:05:03 [Sandy]
- regrets: MSM, Kirk
- 19:05:19 [ginny]
- ginny has joined #sml
- 19:05:51 [Zakim]
- +Ginny_Smith
- 19:06:46 [Sandy]
- topic: Approval of minutes from 2008-11-13 telecon
- 19:07:12 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: approve 2008-11-13 telecon meeting minutes at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Nov/att-0029/20081113-sml-minutes.html
- 19:08:00 [Sandy]
- topic: action items
- 19:08:15 [Sandy]
- Action 203 is done.
- 19:08:15 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - 203
- 19:08:45 [Sandy]
- topic: Cancel 11/27, 12/25, 1/1 due to US Holidays?
- 19:08:58 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: these calls are cancelled.
- 19:09:09 [Sandy]
- topci: Candidate Rec draft status
- 19:09:49 [johnarwe_]
- s/topci/topic/
- 19:10:00 [Sandy]
- Kumar: expected publication date Nov. 25.
- 19:10:42 [Sandy]
- Kuamr: namespace policy was not included in the publication request.
- 19:11:00 [Sandy]
- Kumar: should we have one for each namespace uri, or one that covers all the namespaces?
- 19:11:19 [Sandy]
- John: seems we need one for each namespace URI, which is the same as Len's reading.
- 19:12:05 [Sandy]
- Ginny: how about one document but linked from multiple places?
- 19:12:33 [Sandy]
- Kumar: will confirm with W3C whether it's OK to have single doc with multiple links.
- 19:12:48 [Sandy]
- All: OK with Kumar's draft.
- 19:13:39 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: Kumar to consult with W3C with his draft.
- 19:14:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:14:45 [Sandy]
- topic: Working Group Note drafts
- 19:15:02 [Sandy]
- Len: now has CVS setup OK. wondering where the XLink note should go.
- 19:15:44 [Sandy]
- John: likely to put the notes in the same directory as the specs.
- 19:16:45 [ginny]
- [Public] / 2007 / xml / sml
- 19:16:58 [Sandy]
- Kumar: source/build files need to go to "sml" directory.
- 19:17:35 [ginny]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2007/xml/sml/
- 19:18:49 [Sandy]
- rrsagent, generate minutes
- 19:18:49 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-minutes.html Sandy
- 19:20:47 [Sandy]
- topic: Triage bugs with no keywords or target
- 19:21:11 [Sandy]
- John: seems 4633 is done in the CR candidate draft. should be closed.
- 19:21:22 [Sandy]
- Kumar: yes. I will close 4633.
- 19:23:49 [Sandy]
- John: 6207 is for CR changes. should also be closed.
- 19:24:12 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6237 is new, found looking at cosmos code
- 19:24:31 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:26:43 [Sandy]
- topic: Bug 6237 is SMLIF locator/documentURI content a URI reference?
- 19:27:10 [Sandy]
- John: can documentURI be relative? e.g. to refer to documents in the same directory on the file system.
- 19:27:26 [Sandy]
- John: spec doesn't answer one way or the other
- 19:28:04 [Sandy]
- Ginny: sounds like relative should be allowed.
- 19:28:34 [Sandy]
- John: suggest to use "should". That is, contents of documentURI elements *should* be a URI reference.
- 19:30:06 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/#anyURI
- 19:32:20 [Sandy]
- Ginny: the schema type is anyURI, so relative references are already allowed by the normative schema.
- 19:32:38 [Sandy]
- Sandy: then what base URI should be used to resolve such relative references?
- 19:32:41 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/TR/sml-if/#Base_URI
- 19:34:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:35:36 [Sandy]
- John: 5.3.4 is the relevant section about where the [base URI] is applied.
- 19:35:38 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6191
- 19:35:48 [johnarwe_]
- 11/6 telecon agreed on the following revision.
- 19:35:48 [johnarwe_]
-
- 19:35:48 [johnarwe_]
- smlif 5.4.2, betw existing parag 2 and 3, add:
- 19:35:48 [johnarwe_]
-
- 19:35:48 [johnarwe_]
- Note: Since the URI prefixes specified as ruleAlias and documentAlias elements
- 19:35:49 [johnarwe_]
- are aliases, they are subject to all of the processing for aliases as described
- 19:35:51 [johnarwe_]
- in [5.3.3]. For example, if they are relative references then they would be
- 19:35:53 [johnarwe_]
- transformed to absolute URIs before comparison.
- 19:36:04 [Sandy]
- John: last week we decided that 5.3.4 does cover aliases. A non-normative note was added. See above under bug 6191.
- 19:38:01 [Sandy]
- s/last week/at 2008-11-06 telecon,
- 19:40:26 [johnarwe_]
- It sounds like the proposal emerging is, in section 5.2.2 of SMLIF where it currently says: SML-IF specifies one way that MAY be used to provide the location of the referenced document, the documentURI element.
- 19:40:42 [johnarwe_]
- Have it say: SML-IF specifies one way that MAY be used to provide the location of the referenced document, the documentURI element. (same so far)
- 19:42:50 [johnarwe_]
- ... (new) It is a consequence of documentURI's schema definition that it contains a URI reference, i.e that it may be an absolute URI or relative reference. When it is a relative reference, the [base URI] property SHOULD be used to transform it to an absolute URI, as stated in [5.3.2 Base URIs].
- 19:43:22 [Sandy]
- John: we can add a "should" to say: if documentURI value is relative, then [base URI] *should* be used to resolve it. See above for details.
- 19:45:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:45:43 [Sandy]
- Ginny: this matches my expectation.
- 19:48:00 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: adopt the above wording change to resolve bug 6237. No further review needed.
- 19:49:05 [Sandy]
- ACTION: Michael to add "PR" as a valid "target milestone" value in SML bugzilla system.
- 19:49:05 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-206 - Add \"PR\" as a valid \"target milestone\" value in SML bugzilla system. [on Michael Sperberg-McQueen - due 2008-11-27].
- 19:50:22 [Sandy]
- topic: implementation reports
- 19:50:47 [Sandy]
- John: anyone thinks the impl reports contain member-confidential material?
- 19:50:49 [Sandy]
- All: no.
- 19:51:05 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: move impl report discussion to the public mailing list.
- 19:55:28 [Sandy]
- Kumar: about the impl report format, I think it's easier if the source is in something like Excel, then transform to xml.
- 19:55:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:01:01 [Sandy]
- John: think we are OK with using Excel for now. Wondering how to merge changes made by different people.
- 20:02:09 [Sandy]
- Kumar: we can try to merge the xml file and import back into Excel.
- 20:06:18 [Sandy]
- John: there were concerns about using the generic link to COSMOS CVS repository. We may need to point to specific versions of the test cases.
- 20:06:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:06:47 [Sandy]
- Kumar: better to use the generic pointer (to the latest version) now. after things stablize, we can go through them and add version numbers.
- 20:08:34 [Sandy]
- Kumar: COSMOS impl report looks OK.
- 20:10:03 [Sandy]
- Ginny: also looked at the diff. what's the next step?
- 20:10:15 [Sandy]
- John: need to look at the "potential problem" ones and decide what to do.
- 20:11:02 [Sandy]
- John: first such instance is "SchemaBindingNS". If schema binding is supported, then "SchemaBindingNS" can't be implemented.
- 20:13:02 [Sandy]
- Kumar: sounds like we need a new "conditionally required" category, in addition to "reqiured" and "optional".
- 20:15:20 [Sandy]
- John: Same problem with "smlifBaseUri" and "locatorNS"
- 20:16:15 [Sandy]
- s/"optional"./"optional". The condition can be included in the "description" field.
- 20:17:53 [Sandy]
- Kumar: I wil add the new "CR = conditionally required" category. Will import changes made to description and implementedByCosmos elements.
- 20:18:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:21:51 [Sandy]
- John: noSchemaNV. no implementation for this. should reconsider where this feature belongs. suggest to move from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.
- 20:22:13 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: move "noSchemaNV" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.
- 20:24:04 [Sandy]
- John: Similarly, should "baseUriCheck" be an interop feature?
- 20:24:15 [Sandy]
- Kumar: doesn't look interop.
- 20:24:23 [Sandy]
- Ginny: agreed.
- 20:24:49 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: move "baseUriCheck" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.
- 20:28:09 [Sandy]
- John: "baseUriReq" seems to be a duplicate of "baseUri" (renamed to "baseUriIfRelativeURIExists" in COSMOS report)
- 20:28:23 [johnarwe_]
- new/old line numbers: 105/109 smlif:baseuri 139/152 xml:base 163/176 at least one of them required 219/237 appears to dup the prev one(s)
- 20:28:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:28:40 [johnarwe_]
- new/old line numbers: 105/109 smlif:baseuri 139/152 xml:base 163/176 at least one of them required 219/237 appears to dup the prev one(s)
- 20:29:41 [Sandy]
- [note to scribe: change new/old to old/new]
- 20:33:00 [Sandy]
- Ginny: agree that "baseUriReq" is a duplicate of "baseUri"
- 20:33:41 [Sandy]
- RESOLUTION: remove "baseUriReq" from the feature list.
- 20:34:49 [Sandy]
- Kumar: I will make changes agreed upon today and send out the master copy of the source.
- 20:38:30 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:40:19 [Sandy]
- topic: Other Test Case discussion
- 20:40:45 [Sandy]
- John: will go through Ginny's list and see whether COSMOS already has tests to cover them. e.g. non-schema-determined ID.
- 20:41:54 [Sandy]
- John: should we put the impl report, feature list etc. at a fixed location, so that we don't have to fish through the archive all the time.
- 20:42:07 [Sandy]
- Ginny: sounds like a good idea.
- 20:43:02 [Sandy]
- Kumar: I can add Ginny's list to my Excel. That'll make it easier to manage the lists.
- 20:45:50 [Sandy]
- ACTION: John to put content of Kumar's zip file at a location, preferrably publicly accessible.
- 20:45:50 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-207 - Put content of Kumar's zip file at a location, preferrably publicly accessible. [on John Arwe - due 2008-11-27].
- 20:46:53 [Zakim]
- -[Microsoft]
- 20:46:54 [Zakim]
- -Ginny_Smith
- 20:46:54 [Zakim]
- -Kumar
- 20:46:55 [Zakim]
- -Sandy
- 20:47:00 [Zakim]
- -JohnArwe
- 20:47:01 [Zakim]
- XML_SMLWG()2:00PM has ended
- 20:47:03 [Zakim]
- Attendees were [Microsoft], Sandy, JohnArwe, Kumar, Ginny_Smith
- 20:47:13 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-minutes.html Sandy
- 20:48:02 [Sandy]
- bye rrsagent
- 20:48:09 [RRSAgent]
- I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-actions.rdf :
- 20:48:09 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Michael to add "PR" as a valid "target milestone" value in SML bugzilla system. [1]
- 20:48:09 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-irc#T19-49-05
- 20:48:09 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: John to put content of Kumar's zip file at a location, preferrably publicly accessible. [2]
- 20:48:09 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/20-sml-irc#T20-45-50