ixml Group Teleconference

11 October 2022


Bethan, John, Michael, Norm, Steven

Meeting minutes

<cmsmcq> Good morning, all.


ACTION (2022-06-21): Tom to set up a schematron demo


ACTION (2022-09-13): John to report how many Earley items are reduced

by the changed rewrite rules.


ACTION (2022-09-13): Steve to draft text (in HTML) to resolve the

erratum in issue #145

[Done; please check]

ACTION (2022-09-13): Norm to try out the stylesheet PI trick on the

XML version of the ixml grammar.


Status of implementations

Steven: v4 is up. Mostly code cleanup. Some better error messages. Warns about unreachable rules.

Norm: No change

MSM: None

Steven: I also published my code (using ixml)
… also working on my tutorial.

Status of testing and test suites

Norm: There were commits for a couple of additional ambiguous cases

Issue #145 Character class "LC" doesn't match our grammar

MSM: We agreed to change. We need to confirm the changes.


<norm> https://invisiblexml.org/1.0/errata.html

Norm: Errata is fine

Steven: I'm fine with Norm's version. My action remains to update a future version of the spec.

ACTION: Norm to move the erratum from 'Proposed' to 'Accepted'.

Norm: I would like to propiose spec build process

Spec build process

Norm: I propose moving sources around, and building our docs automatically, so we get to see diff markups.
… Using DeltaXML, for which I have a licence

MSM: Is it possible to inject a paragraph to acknowledge DeltaXML?

Norm: I added a next and previous change button
… all it means is that there will be a source directory
… for this change, edit the spec and make a pull request
… I'll take the action to incorporate the erratum and explain how it works

Bethan: If it's an erratum, it goes into a v1.1?

Norm: Yes, there will be a 1.1 for the change

MSM: 1.0 directory is sacred

Implementation reports (version)

John: I've updated and released a v1
… with drag and drop

John: Ambiguity can be a problem.

Issue #147 Are control characters allowed in an ixml grammar?

Norm: Control characters crash my parser.
… Because it goes through the XML

Bethan: Don't we already cover this?

MSM: Yes and no.

Norm: If so, can we make it more explicit?

MSM: Or otherwise if it doesn't, do we want to say that?
… I have a bias. My parser won't accept such grammars

John: Mine will.

<norm> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/147

Norm: Some ixml grammars have no XML representation

John: Some implementations can, some can't

MSM: I am reluctant to push hard.
… because it gets to talking about implementation choices.
… on the other hand, different behaviours is problematic

MSM: I don't want to push either way.

Bethan: What is the status of the XML serialisation of the ixml grammar?

MSM: some conforming grammars have no conforming XML representation

Bethan: XML representations are dependent on the ixml syntax?
… so the ixml format is logically prior to the XML format

MSM: I would like to check that claim
… yes you are right

Steven: Couldn't we just say implementations should warn?
… I would worry that future targets would add new restrictions to ixml

Steven: We could warn about grammars that wouldn't have an XML representation

MSM: I could live with that.

Steven: How about demanding that control characters always be encoded, and not allowed in strings?

Norm: Forbidding tabs would be good anyway, since they are not visible.

MSM: What is the set of Unicode characters that are not XML characters?

Norm: Differs between XML versions.
… 5th ed forbids c0 and c1

MSM: No, c1 is allowed
… So proposal: String literals in the ixml grammar should exclude all c0 characters. (Or or c0 and c1)

Norm: I could live with either of those
… I think it would be more consistent to forbid both

Steven: I'd like to have time for this to sink in

ACTION: Norm to write a proposal that covers the c0 c1 problem in strings

Issue #138 Home page links to ixml.xml and ixml.ixml

Norm: I'd like to have two links, one that displays, and one that downloads

MSM: You wanted the XML to behave similarly to the IE or Firefox behaviour

Norm: I will do this.

ACTION: Norm to make XML displayable in all browsers


MSM: Next month's meeting raising the question which is our normative timezone

Next call 15th November

Time: Same clocktime as this call


ACTION: Norm to inform group how build process will work

Summary of action items

  1. Norm to move the erratum from 'Proposed' to 'Accepted'.
  2. Norm to write a proposal that covers the c0 c1 problem in strings
  3. Norm to make XML displayable in all browsers
  4. Norm to inform group how build process will work
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 192 (Tue Jun 28 16:55:30 2022 UTC).


Succeeded: s/ious/iours/

Succeeded: s/./?/

Succeeded: s/SO/So/

Succeeded: s/[None]//

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: Steven

Maybe present: MSM, Time