See also: IRC log
CS: advise to jump to XPath 2.0 in TCDL 2.0,
more powerfull than the current XPath 1.0
... no compatibility issues that will impact the subset we are using
CI: we wanted to use EARL pointers, will this
be incompatible? i don't see conflicts.
... we can add XPath 2.0 as another type of pointers in the EARL pointers
draft
... once we do this, I don't see a problem
CS: does the current EARL draft refer to specific XPath version?
CI: don't think so, we just talked about XPath
so far
... may need to include version numbers
CS: we don't have a dependency on EARL pointers anyway
SAZ: concur with CI, but just a question to
clarify
... we are not losing anything when we jump from XPath 1.0 -> XPath 2.0
(in the metadata subset of TCDL 2.0)
... but do we win anything? is there something that we can do now that we
couldN't do before?
... do we even need to specify the version of XPath if they are that
compatible?
CS: if we want to use more complex querries
then we have to use XPath 2.0
... for example built-in datatypes or regular expressions
SAZ: so it is sufficient that the EARL pointer vocabulary identifies the version number?
CS: yes, I think so
... we can find a convention for the time being until the EARL pointer
vocabulary is updated
SAZ: yes, we can use XPath 2.0 for now, and update the EArL pointers at the same time
CS: any objections to this?
<scribe> ACTION: CI include the issue on XPath versions in the EARL pointers planning work [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/19-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01]
RESOLUTION: for now, XPath 2.0 is the default format for any XPath expressions in the metadata
<scribe> ACTION: CS add a clarification note in the metadata on the (temporary) XPath 2.0 convention [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/19-tsdtf-minutes.html#action02]
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Jun/0001.html
CS: we talked about that last time, had an
action item to check the impact of this change
... sent a mail, some need changes
... who volunteers?
MC: i should do some
RR: me too
<scribe> ACTION: MC and RR choose 3 test samples and check if they need to be updated to the new WCAG 2.0 WD (send a mail to list to avoid duplicate work) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/19-tsdtf-minutes.html#action03]
EV: no news right now, look for someone to work on the interface
<Christophe> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2007Jun/0003.html
SAZ: MWI are working on a new interface, we are
coordinating internally
... hopefully we can adopt some of this work from them
CS: SAZ you have an action item open
... also you wanted to move some of the usage docs to the CVS repository
SAZ: sorry, didn't get to it. will try this week
<scribe> ACTION: SAZ update the review process document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/19-tsdtf-minutes.html#action04]
<scribe> ACTION: SAZ move review process document to the CVS repository [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/19-tsdtf-minutes.html#action05]
CS: working on a structure review script
... have some code but still finalizing it
... will announce it soon
<Christophe> Schematron
SAZ: what technology?
CS: schematron, running XSLT 1.0 or XSLT 2.0
<Christophe> see also http://www.schematron.com/