W3C

- DRAFT -

XHTML2 Working Group Teleconference

09 Sep 2009

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
McCarron, Steven, +46.7.06.02.aaaa, Markus, Steven.a
Regrets
Chair
Steven
Scribe
Steven

Contents


 

 

<trackbot> Date: 09 September 2009

zakim?

<mgylling> I am on another call that will end soon. Participating in IRC in the meanwhile.

OK

<scribe> Scribe: Steven

DOM3 Events

Shane: We had asked them for an event DOMready rather than PageLoaded

http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/WD-DOM-Level-3-Events-20090908/

DoC

Shane: Issue 6143

Steven: For XHTML 1.0? They're not going to let us reissue that

<ShaneM> Tracker is at http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/voyager-issues.private

http://www.w3.org/2009/06/10-xhtml-minutes

http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/bjoern-issues.html

http://www.w3.org/2009/06/02-xhtml-minutes.html

http://www.w3.org/2009/06/10-xhtml-minutes.html

http://www.w3.org/2009/06/24-xhtml-minutes.html

Those are the meetings where we discussed issues from the tracking system

Steven: I'm assuming we will produce an (automatic) DoC from the discussions above

Shane: We agreed that it was an error, and that we would fix it in a third edition
... (which this wasn't)
... this is issue 6504
... but now we aren't reissuing, we don't have to worry
... (this is his issue 1)
... Issue 10

<ShaneM> we got your voice mail

Low tech crap

<ShaneM> I can't get it to hang up

Steven: In issue 3 we say that 5th edition is deliberately not used

Shane: Issue 10 is about normative/non-normative
... let me do a quick diff
... I moved XML Names to normative

Steven: Do we need separate sections for references?

<ShaneM> http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2009/PER-xhtml11-20090507/

Shane: Issue 6288 addresses this; that's your pointer

Steven: XHTML1 is referenced in the abstract
... it may have been in section 2.1 originally, which now references the XHTMLMIME document

Shane: I have moved it to nonnormative
... Namsespaces are referred to in conformance, that is already in the Normative refs

Steven: His issue 24
... 1.1 says *and*, print says *or* and basic says *and/or*.
... I believe *and* is correct
... because if a document conforms to the DTD but not to the schema, then it contains an error

dammir

Shane: The schema is more restrictive
... docs that conform to the DTD could fail with the schema, because of datatype checking

Steven: Is there anything the DTD can check that the schema can't?

Shane: I don't know
... Probably

Steven: Possibly
... Well that wraps it for the issues I had.
... I'll create a new version, and send it round

Shane: I'll try and produce the other DoCs in the interim.

[ADJOURN]

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.135 (CVS log)
$Date: 2009/09/09 14:45:27 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/TH/Th/
Succeeded: s/SH/Sh/
Succeeded: s/TH/Th/
Found Scribe: Steven
Inferring ScribeNick: Steven
Default Present: McCarron, Steven, +46.7.06.02.aaaa, Markus, Steven.a
Present: McCarron Steven +46.7.06.02.aaaa Markus Steven.a
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xhtml2/2009Sep/0006
Found Date: 09 Sep 2009
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/09/09-xhtml-minutes.html
People with action items: 

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]