See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: Kirk Wilson
<scribe> scribeNick: Kirk
regrest: Kumar, Sandy
<johnarwe_> minutes of 12/4 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Dec/0027.html
Minutes approved by unanimous consent.
Nothing new.
<lencharest> See public/2007/xml/sml/tests
<scribe> ACTION: 208 to Create directories in CVS [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/11-sml-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 208
208: Create directories in CVS
Provided more information to Len on this action.
190: Draft test case for lax fallback
MSM: No progress
Ginny: Reports that she cannot move tests from Interoperability to Extensibility
John: Ginny can locate
extensibility document from the minutes of F2F.
... Issue for WG--should we remove three features currently in
Interoperability that are not Interop features or keep
them?
<ginny_> From 11/20 minutes:
<ginny_> 1- RESOLUTION: move "noSchemaNV" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.
<ginny_> 2 - RESOLUTION: move "baseUriCheck" from "interop" list to "extensibility" list.1-
<ginny_> 3 - RESOLUTION: remove "baseUriReq" from the feature list.
<ginny_> I propose to simply remove these 3 items from the test spreadsheet since this spreadsheet contains only tests for interop features.
RESOLUTION: Proposal passes without objection.
Len: Reports on progress
regarding loading EPR Ref Scheme and XLink Ref Scheme.
... HMTL did not eliminate Word edit changes.
Kirk: Will work on EPR Ref Scheme references over XMas holidays.
MSM: W3C standard is to publish documents in HTML. How WGs develop such documents is up to the WG.
Len: Will prepare XLink Ref
Scheme for publication.
... Will delete HTML documents from CVS and we will continue to
work on the Word documents.
<ginny> http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2007/xml/sml/
<ginny> This is the web interface to CVS
<johnarwe_> pubrules: http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules
<johnarwe_> (previous url can be found at http://www.w3.org/TR/ at the top, under "related")
<johnarwe_> http://www.w3.org/2008/09/sml-schema.xsd ..
<johnarwe_> previous is the url of a schema file someone found via a google search - have been unable to find out via webreq where it came from, lifecycle, etc
<scribe> ACTION: Michael to investigate source of the url pointing to sml-schema.xsd [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/12/11-sml-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-209 - Investigate source of the url pointing to sml-schema.xsd [on Michael Sperberg-McQueen - due 2008-12-18].
John: No new work.
John: Nothing productive we can do with existing work.
John: Advises the WG to let the WG know if you are going to work on a particular test case.
Concrete responses from COSMOS to our comments.
<johnarwe_> xlsx http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Nov/0053.html
items 16 & 17
<johnarwe_> 16 - base64dtdentity.xml (decoded) contains
<johnarwe_> <?xml version="1.0"?>
<johnarwe_> <!DOCTYPE BOOK [
<johnarwe_> <!ELEMENT BOOK (P*)>
<johnarwe_> <!ELEMENT P (#PCDATA)>
<johnarwe_> <!ENTITY author "HL">
<johnarwe_> <!ENTITY copyright "IBM">
<johnarwe_> ]>
<johnarwe_> <BOOK>
<johnarwe_> <P>chapter 1 - Intro</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>chapter 2 - Conclusion</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>&author;©right;</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>Index</P>
<johnarwe_> </BOOK>
John: Sandy's response
<johnarwe_> smlif says: "...the SML-IF consumer MUST compose a schema using all schema documents included in the SML-IF document and MUST use this schema to validate all instance documents in the interchange model."
<johnarwe_> thus Sandy said that a schema could be constructed, and in this case it would contain only the built-in schema components. ..as a consequence, our comments are correct.
MSM: What was the group thinking it was doing here?
<johnarwe_> smlif: ... 5.4.3 is read.
MSM: Agrees with Sandy interpretation of 5.4.3; therefore MSM agrees with our comments.
No objections to this interpretation.
17: Base64DTDInvalidXML
<johnarwe_> decoded content: <?xml version="1.0"?>
<johnarwe_> <!DOCTYPE BOOK [
<johnarwe_> <!ELEMENT BOOK1 (P*)>
<johnarwe_> <!ELEMENT P (#PCDATA)>
<johnarwe_> <!ENTITY author "HL">
<johnarwe_> <!ENTITY copyright "IBM">
<johnarwe_> ]>
<johnarwe_> <BOOK>
<johnarwe_> <P>chapter 1 - Intro</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>chapter 2 - Conclusion</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>&author;©right;</P>
<johnarwe_> <P>Index</P>
<johnarwe_> </BOOK>
John: Doc invalid because Element is Book1, instance is <Book>.
MSM: Can't be schema valid, unless there is a schema. There needs to be schema.
19-23 Group: Base64EncodedDoc
John: COSMOS has updated test
cases.
... WG should review these test cases for next week to
determine if they are now valid.
... Will attempt to get Sandy to review these.
item 31 uses multiple reference scheme: thus, this is not an area where we can test interop.
MSM: Implementations should
tolerate another scheme even if they don't use it.
... Agrees with John that we can't get to this kind of
test.
John: Uses two sml reference
schemes but must reparse the document with their own sml ref
scheme definition that allows 2 instances for consistency
checking.
... We should drop this text case as not testable under
interoperability
No objection to this approach.
item 32: InvalidConstraintsSubstitution
John: Sandy is reviewing. 32 is correct; 44 still needs to work.
item 49: InValidInCompleteModel.
John: this has been fixed in the spec; test case implemented in COSMOS. WG should review.
item 54:TestDocumentLocator
John: Our comment, regarding sml:refType, is not applicable. Nothing else appears to be wrong. We need to withdraw the comment.
items 55 - 56 TestRulesWithMultiple/UnderOnePattern
John: Fixed and integrated by COSMOS
item 61: InvalidBareNameUnresolved
John: Definition of
"valid"--according to our definition of valid, this is
"Valid".
... from SML-perspective: this is valid
items 62, 66, 67, 83, 90: Same issue as item 31.
John: Multiple schemes, we don't have interop for that.
item 71: SingleRef
John: Another case of definition difference, see item 61. This is not a problem in the test case.
items 83 - 90: Multiple schemes issue
item 92: ValidNilRefPSVI
John: Fixed by bug fix.
item: 114 ValidSchematronRule
John: COSMOS not sure what the
problem is. COSMOS believes this is a valid test case. We need
to provide explanation if we disagree.
... Do we want to take the approach that we will assume their
fixes did indeed fix the problem until someone says otherwise,
or should we have someone review the modified test cases?
Ginny: Let Microsoft run the test cases and MS should inform us if something is wrong.
RESOLUTION: No objections to accepting COSMOS fixes until something is discovered to be incorrect
John: Are we in sufficient position to discuss this topic?
Ginny and Len: We want want to Kumar comes back to discuss specific criteria.
John: In the meantime, he will review completeness of test cases and to code the test cases. Others should do this as well.
No other business.
Adjourn: 3:46 ET
rssagent, generate minutes
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) Succeeded: s/and keep/or keep/ Succeeded: s/Proposals/Proposal/ Succeeded: s/ffrom/from/ Succeeded: s/ValidNilRefDefintion/ValidNilRefPSVI/ Found Scribe: Kirk Wilson Found ScribeNick: Kirk WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: Adjourn Ginny_Smith John Kirk Len MSM Microsoft aaaa aabb ginny ginny_ item johnarwe_ joined lencharest pubrules regrest scribeNick sml smlif trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sml/2008Dec/0027.html Got date from IRC log name: 11 Dec 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/12/11-sml-minutes.html People with action items: 208 michael[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]