See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribenick: Kirk
<scribe> scribe: Kirk Wilson
<johnarwe_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Mar/att-0018/20090309-sml-minutes.html (different value vs agenda!)
RESOLUTION: Approved without objection.
John: Nothing new from this group.
John: Zero opened items.
Henry: RE Action 210. Waiting for WG review before closing it.
<johnarwe_> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/sml/actions/210
John: Henry needs to add appropriate URLs for review.
<ht> You could look at e.g. http://www.w3.org/2008/03/sml.html
WG should review these next week.
s/there/these for
<johnarwe_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Mar/0015.html
<johnarwe_> preceding is URI of Kumar's email soliciting Henry's feedback on specific items
Henry: Will answer the email on this issue.
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6480
Henry: eight Responses
... There is one objection: Update references to XML and XML
Base.
... Reference section contains a dated reference that is not
current version of these specs.
... There are no conformance issues between XML Base 1st and
2nd editions.
Len: Does this objection block acceptance? Otherwise, it does not seem to be critical.
Sandy: Needs time to think of the consequences of upgrading.
<Kirk_> scribe: Kirk_
<lencharest> Link to XML 5th ed. with changes from 4th ed. highlighted: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/REC-xml-20081126-review.html
John: Henry to investigate implications.
Summary
1. Sandy to investigate impact on Xerces of going with XML 5th ED.
2. Henry to investage implications of alternative approaches/check with objector.
3. Microsoft: to check what edition of XML their SML development is based on: what trajectory.
No new comments submitted on this.
<johnarwe_> PDF http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2009Mar/0015.html
<johnarwe_> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/attachment.cgi?id=658
John: Acknowledges that Ginny may have comments on style.
Len: Comment 1--common naming
convention of SML reference schemes. Call this is SML XLink
Scheme.
... EPR note should say EPR-based Reference Scheme for SML.
<johnarwe_> 4.3.1 SML URI Reference Scheme
John: We should defer until Ginny can attend.
<johnarwe_> preceding = on changing title of xlink note
Comments 2 & 3--following EPR Note.
RESOLUTION: Acceptance of these without objection.
Comment 4 is the "same" thing again.
John: Any objection to replace words with hyperlinks as per comments 2, 3, & 4.
RESOLUTION: Passed with no objections. Objections should be raised at particular points.
Comment 5--Merge Note with paragraph
RESOLUTION:
Consensus amongst those present for the merged form for using
"Note".
... In general, there is no objection to letting the spec
editors work this out with note editors.
Comment 6--This is quoted from XLink spec. No objection to accepting the suggested additional wording for clarity.
Comment 7--no objection; accepted.
Comment 8--Len's suggestion: take each numbered item and each one a subheading and number the subbullets.
John: Last week to expressed
concern about making the notes look different from the
spec.
... How strongly do we want to be parallel to the SML spec.
Kirk: Prefers to keep parallel for readability
John: Suggests the Len get together with the spec editors to resolve this issue.
Comment 10--"follow" --> "matches" No objection.
Comment 11--add square brackets to designate a hyperlink on square bracket. No objection.
John: We should tell people to look through Style, and post notes to the issue. If no comments are posted, that will indicate acceptance of the Style change.
Comment 13--"schema of U"
<ht> HST: Would like "URI scheme"
John: Replace "schema" with "URI scheme" No objections.
Comment 15 & 16--Rewording from SML spec
Henry: Wants to look at the text.
John: SML does not define [base URI].
Henry: We need to give thought where to get the definition of base URI for this note.
Adjournment: 1:32 ET
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) FAILED: s/there/these for/ Succeeded: s/ot/to/ Succeeded: s/Reword/Rewording/ Found ScribeNick: Kirk Found Scribe: Kirk Wilson Found Scribe: Kirk_ Inferring ScribeNick: Kirk_ Scribes: Kirk Wilson, Kirk_ ScribeNicks: Kirk, Kirk_ WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Adjournment HST Henry Ht John Kirk Kirk_ Len Microsoft Sandy aaaa aabb johnarwe_ lencharest scribenick You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Regrets: Kumar Got date from IRC log name: 16 Mar 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/03/16-sml-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]