W3C

– DRAFT –
Invisible XML Community Group

25 November 2025

Attendees

Present
Bethan, David, John, Norm, Steven
Regrets
Nico
Chair
Steven
Scribe
Steven

Meeting minutes

Accept the minutes of the previous meeting

[Accepted]

Review of open actions

Norm: The ones marked completed are done

Status reports

Norm: I implemented numbered repetitions, and two versions of modularity.
… both operate in the same way

Steven: We should look at alternative syntaxes as well. I liked Nico's, though not unambiguous, so needs fixing

Steven: I'd like to see Liam's proposal

New open issues

+ #332 Invisible XML media type

invisiblexml/ixml#332

Steven: vnd matches our case

Norm: Wait to see whether W3C situation will allow us to get application/

Steven: I also asked whether we want to use it to kick off the ixml process.

John: It is analogous to xslt

David: Are there examples of processors using parameters like this?

Norm: Can't think of one

+ #329 Unicode version not referenced in the spec

invisiblexml/ixml#329

Norm: We do say there is no requirement on the version of Unicode

Steven: We did agree not to require any particular version

Norm: Let's update to 17, and add prose that repeats we have no requirement on a version

ACTION: Steven to draft prose on Unicode version

+ #330 XML Namespace not referenced in iXML

invisiblexml/ixml#330

Norm: Let's add a ref to the namespaces rec

ACTION: Norm draft prose for namespaces reference

+ #310 Not possible to set priority on rules

invisiblexml/ixml#310

Norm: Not new, now a part of ambiguity topic

First Int’l Symposium on Invisible XML

Steven: Eight submissions so far

Norm: I have created a private repository for submissions

Steven: The Zoom licence I can use looks like it is sufficient for us.

Norm: Registrations?

Steven: Just publish the URL and let people come

John: Still meeting the 16th to look at the submissions

Norm: Yes, at the same time as usual

Ambiguity umbrella topic

Norm: Topic made. What are we going to do?

Steven: The two approaches are 1) let there be ambiguity, and I'll pick one; 2) No ambiguity, handle it in the parser.

Norm: There are two types of ambiguity.
… I'd like to see a document.

ACTION: Steven create a discussion document on ambiguity.

Perspectives on serialization

Steven: Merge.

Next meeting

Steven: Skip the 9th, and next meeting is the 16th
… next after that will be 6th January

AOB

David: Is there any prep for the 16th?

Norm: If there are more than 50, we will have to decide, and we can also account for how much time.

[ADJOURN]

Summary of action items

  1. Steven to draft prose on Unicode version
  2. Norm draft prose for namespaces reference
  3. Steven create a discussion document on ambiguity.
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 248 (Mon Oct 27 20:04:16 2025 UTC).

Diagnostics

Succeeded: s/pd/d/

Succeeded: s/out/our/

Succeeded: s/Whare/What are/

Succeeded: s/xx/x/

Succeeded: s/\//

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: Steven

All speakers: David, John, Norm, Steven

Active on IRC: Steven