IRC log of sml on 2008-12-11
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:03:15 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sml
- 19:03:15 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/12/11-sml-irc
- 19:03:49 [ginny]
- ginny has joined #sml
- 19:04:03 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #sml
- 19:05:31 [Kirk]
- Meeting: SML WG Teleconference Dec 11, 2008
- 19:05:42 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, who's here?
- 19:05:42 [Zakim]
- sorry, johnarwe_, I don't know what conference this is
- 19:05:44 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see ginny, RRSAgent, Kirk, johnarwe_, lencharest, trackbot
- 19:05:47 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, this is sml
- 19:05:47 [Zakim]
- ok, johnarwe_; that matches XML_SMLWG()2:00PM
- 19:05:56 [johnarwe_]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Dec/0027.html
- 19:06:07 [Kirk]
- chair: John Arwe
- 19:06:31 [Kirk]
- scribe: Kirk Wilson
- 19:06:44 [Kirk]
- scribeNick: Kirk
- 19:07:08 [Kirk]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 19:08:37 [Kirk]
- zakim, who's on the phone?
- 19:08:37 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see +1.845.433.aaaa, [Microsoft], +1.603.823.aabb, MSM, Ginny_Smith
- 19:08:49 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, aaaa is me
- 19:08:49 [Zakim]
- +johnarwe_; got it
- 19:08:51 [Kirk]
- regrest: Kumar, Sandy
- 19:09:00 [johnarwe_]
- zakim, aabb is Kirk
- 19:09:00 [Zakim]
- +Kirk; got it
- 19:09:17 [lencharest]
- zakim, [Microsoft] is me
- 19:09:17 [Zakim]
- +lencharest; got it
- 19:09:28 [johnarwe_]
- minutes of 12/4 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Dec/0027.html
- 19:09:37 [Kirk]
- Topic: Approval of Minutes
- 19:10:08 [Kirk]
- Minutes approved by unanimous consent.
- 19:10:37 [Kirk]
- Topic: Communication from CG
- 19:10:44 [Kirk]
- Nothing new.
- 19:10:53 [Kirk]
- Topic: Action Items
- 19:11:09 [lencharest]
- See public/2007/xml/sml/tests
- 19:12:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:12:38 [Kirk]
- Action 208: Create directories in CVS
- 19:12:38 [trackbot]
- Sorry, couldn't find user - 208
- 19:13:00 [Kirk]
- 208: Create directories in CVS
- 19:14:35 [Kirk]
- Provided more information to Len on this action.
- 19:15:57 [Kirk]
- 190: Draft test case for lax fallback
- 19:16:04 [Kirk]
- MSM: No progress
- 19:17:56 [Kirk]
- Topic: Next steps on Documents
- 19:18:52 [Kirk]
- Ginny: Reports that she cannot move tests from Interoperability to Extensibility
- 19:19:24 [Kirk]
- John: Ginny can locate extensibility document from the minutes of F2F.
- 19:20:41 [Kirk]
- John: Issue for WG--should we remove three features currently in Interoperability that are not Interop features and keep them?
- 19:22:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:22:24 [ginny_]
- From 11/20 minutes:
- 19:22:26 [ginny_]
- 1- RESOLUTION: move "noSchemaNV" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.
- 19:22:28 [ginny_]
- 2 - RESOLUTION: move "baseUriCheck" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.1-
- 19:22:29 [ginny_]
- 3 - RESOLUTION: remove "baseUriReq" from the feature list.
- 19:22:31 [ginny_]
- I propose to simply remove these 3 items from the test spreadsheet since this spreadsheet contains only tests for interop features.
- 19:22:56 [johnarwe_]
- s/and keep/or keep/
- 19:23:30 [Kirk]
- RESOLUTION: Proposals passes without objection.
- 19:23:39 [Kirk]
- s/Proposals/Proposal
- 19:24:46 [Kirk]
- TOPIC: Working Group Document
- 19:25:29 [Kirk]
- Len: Reports on progress regarding loading EPR Ref Scheme and XLink Ref Scheme.
- 19:26:08 [Kirk]
- Len: HMTL did not eliminate Word edit changes.
- 19:26:43 [Kirk]
- Kirk: Will work on EPR Ref Scheme references over XMas holidays.
- 19:28:39 [Kirk]
- MSM: W3C standard is to publish documents in HTML. How WGs develop such documents is up to the WG.
- 19:30:24 [Kirk]
- Len: Will prepare XLink Ref Scheme for publication.
- 19:32:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:35:08 [Kirk]
- Len: Will delete HTML documents from CVS and we will continue to work on the Word documents.
- 19:36:28 [ginny]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2007/xml/sml/
- 19:36:53 [ginny]
- This is the web interface to CVS
- 19:37:13 [johnarwe_]
- pubrules: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules
- 19:37:42 [johnarwe_]
- (previous url can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/ at the top, under "related")
- 19:39:33 [johnarwe_]
- http://www.w3.org/2008/09/sml-schema.xsd ..
- 19:40:26 [johnarwe_]
- previous is the url of a schema file someone found via a google search - have been unable to find out via webreq where it came from, lifecycle, etc
- 19:41:26 [Kirk]
- ACTION: Michael to investigate source of the url pointing to sml-schema.xsd
- 19:41:26 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-209 - Investigate source of the url pointing to sml-schema.xsd [on Michael Sperberg-McQueen - due 2008-12-18].
- 19:41:45 [Kirk]
- Topic: New Work:
- 19:42:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:42:22 [Kirk]
- John: No new work.
- 19:42:39 [Kirk]
- Topic: Existing Work
- 19:42:53 [Kirk]
- John: Nothing productive we can do with existing work.
- 19:43:04 [Kirk]
- Topic: Test Case Discussion
- 19:44:02 [Kirk]
- John: Advises the WG to let the WG know if you are going to work on a particular test case.
- 19:44:55 [Kirk]
- Concrete responses from COSMOS to our comments.
- 19:44:56 [johnarwe_]
- xlsx http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Nov/0053.html
- 19:48:35 [Kirk]
- items 16 & 17
- 19:50:26 [johnarwe_]
- 16 - base64dtdentity.xml (decoded) contains
- 19:50:27 [johnarwe_]
- <?xml version="1.0"?>
- 19:50:27 [johnarwe_]
- <!DOCTYPE BOOK [
- 19:50:27 [johnarwe_]
- <!ELEMENT BOOK (P*)>
- 19:50:27 [johnarwe_]
- <!ELEMENT P (#PCDATA)>
- 19:50:27 [johnarwe_]
- <!ENTITY author "HL">
- 19:50:29 [johnarwe_]
- <!ENTITY copyright "IBM">
- 19:50:32 [johnarwe_]
- ]>
- 19:50:34 [johnarwe_]
-
- 19:50:35 [johnarwe_]
- <BOOK>
- 19:50:37 [johnarwe_]
- <P>chapter 1 - Intro</P>
- 19:50:39 [johnarwe_]
- <P>chapter 2 - Conclusion</P>
- 19:50:42 [johnarwe_]
- <P>&author;©right;</P>
- 19:50:43 [johnarwe_]
- <P>Index</P>
- 19:50:46 [johnarwe_]
- </BOOK>
- 19:52:11 [Kirk]
- John: Sandy's response
- 19:52:15 [johnarwe_]
- smlif says: "...the SML-IF consumer MUST compose a schema using all schema documents included in the SML-IF document and MUST use this schema to validate all instance documents in the interchange model."
- 19:53:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 19:54:08 [johnarwe_]
- thus Sandy said that a schema could be constructed, and in this case it would contain only the built-in schema components. ..as a consequence, our comments are correct.
- 19:55:54 [Kirk]
- MSM: What was the group thinking it was doing here?
- 19:56:47 [johnarwe_]
- smlif: ... 5.4.3 is read.
- 19:59:23 [Kirk]
- MSM: Agrees with Sandy interpretation of 5.4.3; therefore MSM agrees with our comments.
- 19:59:39 [Kirk]
- No objections to this interpretation.
- 20:00:03 [Kirk]
- 17: Base64DTDInvalidXML
- 20:00:12 [johnarwe_]
- decoded content: <?xml version="1.0"?>
- 20:00:13 [johnarwe_]
- <!DOCTYPE BOOK [
- 20:00:13 [johnarwe_]
- <!ELEMENT BOOK1 (P*)>
- 20:00:13 [johnarwe_]
- <!ELEMENT P (#PCDATA)>
- 20:00:13 [johnarwe_]
- <!ENTITY author "HL">
- 20:00:14 [johnarwe_]
- <!ENTITY copyright "IBM">
- 20:00:17 [johnarwe_]
- ]>
- 20:00:18 [johnarwe_]
-
- 20:00:21 [johnarwe_]
- <BOOK>
- 20:00:22 [johnarwe_]
- <P>chapter 1 - Intro</P>
- 20:00:24 [johnarwe_]
- <P>chapter 2 - Conclusion</P>
- 20:00:27 [johnarwe_]
- <P>&author;©right;</P>
- 20:00:28 [johnarwe_]
- <P>Index</P>
- 20:00:31 [johnarwe_]
- </BOOK>
- 20:02:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:02:35 [Kirk]
- John: Doc invalid because Element is Book1, instance is <Book>.
- 20:04:16 [Kirk]
- MSM: Can't be schema valid, unless there is a schema. There needs to be schema.
- 20:04:55 [Kirk]
- 19-23 Group: Base64EncodedDoc
- 20:06:57 [Kirk]
- John: COSMOS has updated test cases.
- 20:07:50 [Kirk]
- John: WG should review these test cases for next week to determine if they are now valid.
- 20:08:55 [Kirk]
- John: Will attempt to get Sandy to review these.
- 20:12:20 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:12:21 [Kirk]
- item 31 uses multiple reference scheme: thus, this is not an area where we can test interop.
- 20:13:13 [Kirk]
- MSM: Implementations should tolerate another scheme even if they don't use it.
- 20:17:38 [Kirk]
- ...Agrees with John that we can't get to this kind of test.
- 20:18:21 [Kirk]
- John: Uses two sml reference schemes but must reparse the document with their own sml ref scheme definition that allows 2 instances for consistency checking.
- 20:18:51 [Kirk]
- John: We should drop this text case as not testable under interoperability
- 20:19:00 [Kirk]
- No objection to this approach.
- 20:19:18 [Kirk]
- item 32: InvalidConstraintsSubstitution
- 20:20:24 [Kirk]
- John: Sandy is reviewing. 32 is correct; 44 still needs to work.
- 20:21:17 [Kirk]
- item 49: InValidInCompleteModel.
- 20:22:05 [Kirk]
- John: this has been fixed in the spec; test case implemented in COSMOS. WG should review.
- 20:22:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:22:33 [Kirk]
- item 54:TestDocumentLocator
- 20:23:36 [Kirk]
- John: Our comment, regarding sml:refType, is not applicable. Nothing else appears to be wrong. We need to withdraw the comment.
- 20:25:17 [Kirk]
- items 55 - 56 TestRulesWithMultiple/UnderOnePattern
- 20:26:57 [Kirk]
- John: Fixed and integrated by COSMOS
- 20:29:32 [Kirk]
- item 61: InvalidBareNameUnresolved
- 20:30:16 [Kirk]
- John: Definition of "valid"--according to our definition of valid, this is "Valid".
- 20:31:00 [Kirk]
- ...ffrom SML-perspective: this is valid
- 20:31:07 [Kirk]
- s/ffrom/from
- 20:31:53 [Kirk]
- items 62, 66, 67, 83, 90: Same issue as item 31.
- 20:32:11 [Kirk]
- John: Multiple schemes, we don't have interop for that.
- 20:32:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:32:34 [Kirk]
- item 71: SingleRef
- 20:34:04 [Kirk]
- John: Another case of definition difference, see item 61. This is not a problem in the test case.
- 20:34:23 [Kirk]
- items 83 - 90: Multiple schemes issue
- 20:34:51 [Kirk]
- item 92: ValidNilRefDefintion
- 20:35:36 [Kirk]
- John: Fixed by bug fix.
- 20:35:56 [Kirk]
- s/ValidNilRefDefintion/ValidNilRefPSVI
- 20:37:44 [Kirk]
- item: 114 ValidSchematronRule
- 20:38:38 [Kirk]
- John: COSMOS not sure what the problem is. COSMOS believes this is a valid test case. We need to provide explanation if we disagree.
- 20:40:34 [Kirk]
- John: Do we want to take the approach that we will assume their fixes did indeed fix the problem until someone says otherwise, or should we have someone review the modified test cases?
- 20:41:24 [Kirk]
- Ginny: Let Microsoft run the test cases and MS should inform us if something is wrong.
- 20:42:13 [Kirk]
- RESOLUTION: No objections to accepting COSMOS fixes until something is discovered to be incorrect
- 20:42:19 [ginny_]
- ginny_ has joined #sml
- 20:42:28 [Kirk]
- Topic: Success Criteria.
- 20:43:07 [Kirk]
- John: Are we in sufficient position to discuss this topic?
- 20:44:54 [Kirk]
- Ginny and Len: We want want to Kumar comes back to discuss specific criteria.
- 20:46:02 [Kirk]
- John: In the meantime, he will review completeness of test cases and to code the test cases. Others should do this as well.
- 20:46:24 [Kirk]
- No other business.
- 20:46:36 [Zakim]
- -MSM
- 20:46:38 [Zakim]
- -lencharest
- 20:46:40 [Kirk]
- Adjourn: 3:46 ET
- 20:46:43 [Zakim]
- -Ginny_Smith
- 20:47:17 [Kirk]
- rssagent, generate minutes
- 20:48:45 [Kirk]
- rrsagent, generate minutes
- 20:48:45 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/12/11-sml-minutes.html Kirk
- 20:49:01 [Zakim]
- -johnarwe_
- 20:49:21 [Zakim]
- -Kirk
- 20:49:23 [Zakim]
- XML_SMLWG()2:00PM has ended
- 20:49:25 [Zakim]
- Attendees were +1.845.433.aaaa, +1.603.823.aabb, MSM, Ginny_Smith, johnarwe_, Kirk, lencharest
- 21:12:13 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #sml
- 21:12:36 [johnarwe_]
- johnarwe_ has left #sml