13:08:37 RRSAgent has joined #forms 13:08:37 logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-irc 13:08:41 zakim, list 13:08:41 I see no active conferences 13:08:42 scheduled at this time are Team_SysWeb()8:00AM, SW_RIF(TPAC)8:00AM, WAI_UAWG(TP)8:00AM, SEC_WSCWG(TPAC)8:00AM 13:09:09 rrsagent, make log public 13:09:32 Meeting: Forms WG FtF, Cambridge, MA, USA, Day 1 13:09:35 Agenda: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Nov/0027 13:09:39 Agenda: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Nov/0027 13:09:41 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Nov/0027 13:09:48 Chair: John 13:20:47 Nick has joined #Forms 13:27:56 zakim, list 13:27:56 I see no active conferences 13:27:57 scheduled at this time are Team_SysWeb()8:00AM, SW_RIF(TPAC)8:00AM, WAI_EOWG(TPAC)8:30AM, XML_XMLCore(TPAC)8:30AM, WAI_UAWG(TP)8:00AM, SEC_WSCWG(TPAC)8:00AM 13:34:42 Charlie has joined #forms 13:37:15 zakim, room for 4? 13:37:16 ok, Steven; conference Team_(forms)13:37Z scheduled with code 26631 (CONF1) for 60 minutes until 1437Z 13:37:37 zakim, help 13:37:37 Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot for more detailed help. 13:37:39 Some of the commands I know are: 13:37:40 xxx is yyy - establish yyy as the name of unknown party xxx 13:37:42 if yyy is 'me' or 'I', your nick is substituted 13:37:45 xxx may be yyy - establish yyy as possibly the name of unknown party xxx 13:37:47 I am xxx - establish your nick as the name of unknown party xxx 13:37:49 xxx holds yyy [, zzz ...] - establish xxx as a group name and yyy, etc. as participants within that group 13:37:51 xxx also holds yyy - add yyy to the list of participants in group xxx 13:37:53 who's here? - lists the participants on the phone 13:37:55 who's muted? - lists the participants who are muted 13:37:57 mute xxx - mutes party xxx (like pressing 61#) 13:38:00 unmute xxx - reverses the effect of "mute" and of 61# 13:38:02 is xxx here? - reports whether a party named like xxx is present 13:38:04 list conferences - reports the active conferences 13:38:05 this is xxx - associates this channel with conference xxx 13:38:06 excuse us - disconnects from the irc channel 13:38:07 I last learned something new on $Date: 2007/11/05 23:08:09 $ 13:47:05 wellsk has joined #forms 13:51:07 John_Boyer2 has joined #forms 13:52:03 rrsagent, make log public 13:52:13 zakim, who's your daddy? 13:52:13 Ralph is taking good care of me but you all are my family, Steven 13:53:33 John_Boyer has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Nov/0030.html 13:53:38 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-forms/2007Nov/0030.html 13:55:24 zakim, code? 13:55:24 the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), Steven 13:56:23 raman has joined #forms 13:56:39 Morning Gang! 13:56:47 Hey Raman! 13:56:48 morning 13:56:53 At the TAG meeting, but hoping to drop in once in a while if you will let me in 13:56:58 Hey Raman! 13:57:07 certainly 13:58:01 will probably show up post-lunch 13:58:29 This afternoon will actually be working out the last few technical issues for 1.1 CR. This morning is 1.2... 13:58:42 Unless the plan changes 14:00:00 can you swap -- I'll get bored with 1.1 issues and end up playing sudoku instead ... 14:00:20 when are we meeting voice/mmi? would like to be there for "old-time's" sake 14:00:47 Later this afternoon. From 4pm to 5 14:00:58 * hi Raman! 14:01:06 Will meet again tomorrow, focused on MMI, too 14:01:29 Hi Charlie! 14:01:42 * today is everything but events...tomorrow is events with MMI 14:01:55 Let me talk to everyone about swapping things, Raman. 14:02:13 Thanks John! 14:04:27 Hi Raman, we'll talk about 1.1 now, and then 1.2 in the afternoon. Look forward to seeing you again, Raman! 14:08:48 markbirbeck has joined #forms 14:09:25 thanks John! 14:09:42 MarkB is probably shuddering now that I wont be playing sudoku when I show up. 14:18:20 Scribe: Steven 14:18:39 Topic: Issue 87/Schema problem 14:19:28 http://htmlwg.mn.aptest.com/cgi-bin/xforms-issues/Model?id=87;user=guest;statetype=1;upostype=-1;changetype=-1;restype=-1 14:19:56 John: We now say that all schema are applicable to all the instances 14:20:07 ... without saying what 'applicable' means 14:20:13 ... and that's the problem 14:20:19 ... There are two kinds of schema 14:20:40 ... 1) schema+NS+structure+datatypes 14:20:46 ... 2) type library 14:21:19 ... without any structure bits 14:21:54 ... This second kind, which Leigh says that people have been doing for years, 14:22:06 ... is a problem for the default processing for an XML Schema processor 14:22:18 ... which by default does a strict assessment 14:22:34 ... which looks for declared elements, and does a check based on that 14:22:52 ... but a type library causes it to flag an error on the root element 14:23:10 ... and then continues with lax assessment 14:23:37 ... (the schema spec says that processors MAY do this) 14:24:18 Present: Charlie, Nick, Steven, John, Keith 14:24:58 John: So this text on the screen attempts to explain what a Forms processor should do 14:25:33 Steven: And this is not a problem with bringing oin off-the-shelf processors? 14:25:48 John: No. And others have to solve this same problem anyway 14:26:24 ... but Erik doesn't like this because others do it in other ways 14:27:51 ... so do we define it this way, or add an attribute to control how it is done? 14:28:03 Charlie: This would be an attribute on the instance? 14:28:10 John: Yes 14:29:55 Charlie: You don't want to expose the standard author to this sort of stuff 14:30:32 ... so I favour what is proposed in the spec 14:31:14 For each namespace, a test is performed to determine whether to instruct the XML Schema processor to perform strict assesment or lax assesment for items in that namespace. If there is no schema for a namespace, or if there is and it contains no top-level xs:element or xs:attribute declarations, then lax assesment is performed for each element or at 14:31:32 tribute in that namespace, and the test is applied to any children in other namespaces. If the schema for a namespace contains at least one top-level xs:element or xs:attributedeclaration, then strict assessment is performed for all elements and attributes in that namespace. 14:31:43 This is the text from Leigh 14:32:04 s/assesment/assessment/G 14:32:05 Erik's proposal was Default of strict 14:32:52 markbirbeck has left #forms 14:32:58 John: Will the author of a type library understand the strict/lax stuff? 14:33:01 markbirbeck has joined #forms 14:33:01 markbirbeck has left #forms 14:33:16 Steven: Not necessarily; anyway, the userof such a library surely won't in general 14:37:27 Steven: Is there no way for the schema to say that it is a type library, therefore lax? 14:37:33 John: No 14:38:22 John: Leigh described a different implementation strategy 14:38:41 ... some implementations build up a master schema from all available schemas 14:38:57 ... and they somehow know when a schema is a type library 14:39:15 ... (though neither Leigh nor I know how they do that) 14:47:52 John: The problem with the solution proposed that I don't know how to create the 'super-schema' that can mark the type libraries as lax 14:49:11 markbirbeck has joined #forms 14:49:23 rrsagent, make minutes 14:49:23 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-minutes.html Steven 14:50:34 John: We will revisit schema validation in the future for future versions 14:52:48 Steven: We could simplify the text to just say "Data type library schemas should be vlidated in lax mode" 14:52:59 ... AND LEAVE IT TO THE PROCESSOR TO DECIDE HOW 14:53:27 s/AND LEAVE IT TO THE PROCESSOR TO DECIDE HOW/and leave it to the processor to decide how/ 14:54:04 Keith: Why not delete the first and last sentences, wouldn't that be enough? 14:54:44 s/userof/user of/ 14:55:20 John: Yes, we could reword 14:57:46 If the schema for a namespace contains at least one top-level xs:element or xs:attributedeclaration, then strict assessment is performed for all elements and attributes in that namespace. If there is no schema for a namespace, or if there is and it contains no top-level xs:element or xs:attribute declarations, then lax assessment is performed for e 14:57:51 My IRC client has a weird bug...I am not getting any messages in the forms window, even though XHTML and RDFa windows work fine! 14:57:57 ach element or attribute in that namespace. 14:58:01 I type...nothing appears. :) 14:58:09 we see it 14:59:13 Steven: Can't you use "otherwise" for the second sentence to make it shorter 14:59:19 ? 14:59:42 John: Yes! Then I can paste it into irc in one go! Watch this: 15:01:21 If the schema for a namespace contains at least one top-level xs:element or xs:attributedeclaration, then strict assessment is performed for all elements and attributes in that namespace. Otherwise, lax assessment is performed for each element or attribute in that namespace. 15:02:06 Steven: "10 01If the schema for a namespace contains at least one top-level xs:element or xs:attributedeclaration, then strict assessment is performed for all elements and attributes in that namespace, otherwise, lax assessment is performed" 15:02:22 Does that mean that if I define a type for an integer being between one and a hundred, the whole document gets validated? 15:02:30 John: We may never take the XSLT 2 route to control the applicability of schema 15:03:01 Oh...no...take that back. I see. 15:06:02 John: Especially since we may use more schema types than just CML Schema 15:06:07 s/CML/XML/ 15:06:14 ... in the future 15:18:41 [Michael SperbergMcQueen, Schema Expert, enters room] 15:24:17 MSM: What you are ruynning up against is not a problem with your imports, but elsewhere 15:24:28 s/ruyn/run/ 15:24:59 MSM: The schema spec is trying to do you a favour 15:25:39 ... when a validator is invoked, the spec tries to stay out of negotiations between invoker and validator 15:26:03 ... so you can start validation in a number of ways, and 1.1 makes it clearer 15:26:18 ... you identify either an element or attribute and a schema 15:26:33 ... and then validate in a number of ways 15:26:54 ... with an element declaration, with a datatype 15:27:00 ... and other ways 15:27:41 ... the spec doesn't require any one of those ways 15:27:51 ... it depends on context 15:28:33 ... what you can do is say that validation needs to start in a particular way 15:30:27 ... when you are matching lax, if you don't find a declaration, a 1.0 processor can move on without doing anything OR may fall back to lax processing 15:32:33 ... so you can skip the subtree, or to process a number of levels, or process all the way down laxly 15:35:45 MSM: So I think the validator that complains in the use of datatype libraries, is doing the "skip the subtree" step 15:37:34 [Discussion of section 5.2 in Schema spec, Assessing Schema Validity] 15:42:27 [John shows an example on the screen for MSM, showing all the schema usage possibilities in XForms] 15:45:20 MSM: What you need to say is that lax processing occurs, with recursion 15:46:09 ... because in lax mode, once you have a declaration, you get into strict mode 15:47:29 [walk through the XML Schema spec at this point] 15:47:49 rrsagent, make minutes 15:47:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-minutes.html Steven 15:50:36 http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#validation_outcome 15:50:49 http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/#cvc-assess-elt 15:53:10 [MSM shows that when a declaration is found the element gets processed properly] 15:57:41 John: THis is fantastic. Eric has been trying to persuade us that this was the case, and Leigh and I didn't believe it 15:57:46 s/TH/Th/ 16:00:45 MSM: So some elements will be marked as validity checked, but validity unknown 16:07:56 Steven: So we are OK, *unless* the root element is worng 16:08:11 ... and then the error won't be given 16:08:18 s/worng/wrong/ 16:09:21 ... since we start off lax 16:10:25 Zakim has left #forms 16:11:02 Zakim has joined #forms 16:11:08 zakim, list 16:11:08 I see SW_HCLS(BioRDF)11:00AM, WAI_EOWG(TPAC)8:30AM, XML_XMLCore(TPAC)8:30AM, WAI_UAWG(TP)8:00AM, IA_WAF()9:00AM active 16:11:10 also scheduled at this time are Team_(forms)13:37Z, WAI_PFWG(ARIA)10:00AM, SW_RIF(TPAC)8:00AM, SW_POWDER()11:00AM, XML_QueryWG()11:00AM, MM_MMI()10:00AM, SEC_WSCWG(TPAC)8:00AM 16:11:17 zakim, this is forms 16:11:17 Steven, I see Team_(forms)13:37Z in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be forms". 16:11:26 zakim, this will be forms 16:11:26 ok, Steven; I see Team_(forms)13:37Z scheduled to start 154 minutes ago 16:16:08 Charlie has joined #forms 16:16:41 John: Thank you so much Michael 16:16:46 [Michael leaves] 16:20:30 klotz has joined #forms 16:21:32 raman has joined #forms 16:22:00 Hi Leigh and Raman, just got to a late break... 16:25:01 klotz has joined #forms 16:25:26 restart 16:25:47 zakim, dial revere_a 16:25:47 I am sorry, Steven; I do not know a number for revere_a 16:27:17 zakim, what is the code? 16:27:17 the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), klotz 16:27:22 Team_(forms)13:37Z has now started 16:27:29 +Leigh_Klotz 16:27:39 zakim, dial paul_revere_a 16:27:39 ok, Steven; the call is being made 16:27:41 +Paul_revere_a 16:28:58 zakim, paul_revere_a has Steven, John, Charlie, Kieth, Nick 16:28:58 +Steven, John, Charlie, Kieth, Nick; got it 16:29:52 The schema definitions for a namespace ar applicalble to instance nodes based on initializing processing in 28<21termref20 def28="def-lax-processing28">lax mode28. Note that schema processing for nodes with matching schema declarations is governed by its content processing definition, which is strict by default. 16:32:54 raman has joined #forms 16:33:24 look for me at the lunch break -- so one of you can pick me up to join the forms meeting after lunch. 16:33:38 ok 16:36:38 [Leigh discusses aspects of new decision] 16:37:55 Leigh: There are variations of Steven's problem; validity checking doesn't kick in until you find an element with a declaration 16:41:24 John: What we actually want doesn't seem to be supported by existing Schema engines 16:41:50 Leigh: The way to do it is like XSLT 2 16:42:38 John: Yikes 16:45:00 r structuresr declares e, but does not declare badness as a childr f is not declared as top levelr 16:45:11 r r ...r r 16:46:03 John: In this example, this instance will not be found to be invalid 16:48:03 Net answer to your question: conforming processors can be written to validate any element you like. Not all processors need provide this service: buy or use processors that validate the information you need validated. By the way, the detailed rules give the processor a choice of validating the element against some particular identified element declaration, some particular identified complex type, or to use the mechanisms of strict, lax etc. to determine what to 16:48:03 validate based on what declarations happen to be available. All of this is explained at xmlschema-1. 16:48:12 from http://www.schemavalid.com/faq/xml-schema.html#d4 16:49:48 Leigh: We need to adress these questions. The validation only occurs at submission time 16:50:59 ... if there is no schema definition then we don't validate, and if there is, we go strict 16:52:11 John: You have to write a schema if you want schema validation 16:52:51 Leigh: I'm ok with aqll this. If we want more stuff, let's do it in 1.2 16:52:57 s/aql//all/ 16:53:14 s/alll/all/ 16:53:41 John: Proposed wording is above 16:54:03 Nick: But there is a bit in schema that is a MAY and it should be a MUST for us 16:54:25 Leigh: Use the wording from XSLT 2 16:54:40 ... that makes it required 16:55:33 http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#validating-using-validation-attribute 16:56:11 Leigh: Yes, that 16:56:19 In the case of an element, a top-level element declaration is identified whose local name and namespace (if any) match the name of the element, and schema-validity assessment is carried out according to the rules defined in [XML Schema Part 1] (section 3.3.4 "Element Declaration Validation Rules", validation rule "Schema-Validity Assessment (Element)", clauses 1.1 and 2, using the top-level element declaration as the "declaration stipulated by the processor", whi 16:56:19 y to contained elements and attributes to the extent required by the schema definition. 16:57:07 When the parent element lacks a declaration, the XML Schema specification defines the recursive checking of children and attributes as optional. For this specification, this recursive checking is required. 16:57:10 "Note: 16:57:10 16:57:10 When the parent element lacks a declaration, the XML Schema specification defines the recursive checking of children and attributes as optional. For this specification, this recursive checking is required." 16:58:39 John: Is that normative? 16:58:47 Steven: I think it explains the text above 16:58:56 John: OK. SO we make that text normative in our spec 16:59:03 s/SO/So/ 17:00:53 John: Like this: 17:02:01 The schema definitions for a namespace are applicable to instance nodes based on initializing processing in 28<21termref20 def28="def-lax-processing28">lax mode28. When an element lacks a schema declaration, the XML Schema specification defines the recursive checking of children and attributes as optional. For this specification, this recursive chec 17:02:18 king is required. 17:02:39 Also, a note immediately following to clarify the following: 17:02:40 Note that schema processing for nodes with matching schema declarations is governed by its content processing definition, which is strict by default. 17:03:19 Finally, a note in revalidate event to say that "applicable" schema definitions is as defined in the above content (which is in the description of the model element) 17:03:31 [Lunch] 17:04:10 rrsagent, make minutes 17:04:10 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-minutes.html Steven 17:04:25 -Leigh_Klotz 17:05:02 s/aqll/all/ 17:12:54 TAG still tagging along -- not sure when we break for lunch 17:30:18 raman has left #forms 18:18:05 returning now 18:18:20 rrsagent, make minutes 18:18:20 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-minutes.html John_Boyer 18:19:45 scribe: wellsk 18:20:40 John: 1st question -- go with last XML schema discussion change? 18:20:53 Charlie has joined #forms 18:21:41 Steven: will we have unavoidable behaviors? 18:21:44 Proposed Resolution: Validation starts lax; schema applicability defined as above. Note in revalidate event referencing schema applicability statements 18:22:34 Steven: do we have enough members to make decision? 18:22:46 John: yes -- thanks to Michael 18:22:50 zakim, who us here? 18:22:50 I don't understand your question, Steven. 18:22:57 zakim, who is here? 18:22:57 On the phone I see Paul_revere_a 18:22:58 Paul_revere_a has Steven, John, Charlie, Kieth, Nick 18:23:00 On IRC I see Charlie, klotz, Zakim, John_Boyer, wellsk, Nick, RRSAgent, Steven, trackbot-ng 18:23:13 Also Leigh agreed before break, and this is what Erik proposed originally 18:23:25 zakim, kieth has left paul_revere_a 18:23:25 -Kieth; got it 18:23:38 zakim, pault_revere_a also has Keith 18:23:38 sorry, Steven, I do not recognize a party named 'pault_revere_a' 18:23:43 John: Is everyone ok with statement. 18:23:49 everyone: yes 18:23:57 zakim, paul_revere_a also has Keith 18:23:57 +Keith; got it 18:24:40 RESOLUTION: Validation starts lax; schema applicability defined as above. Note in revalidate event referencing schema applicability statements 18:25:12 Action: John_Boyer to amend spec to resolve issue 87 18:25:12 Sorry, couldn't find user - John_Boyer 18:25:31 trackbot-ng, list users 18:25:49 trackbot, list users 18:26:01 trackbot-ng, help 18:26:01 See http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/ for help (use the IRC bot link) 18:26:14 John: next topic: tweak insert action 18:26:41 John: recent changes to insert damaged last call issue (Eric) 18:26:47 trackbot-ng, status 18:27:27 Action: jboyer to amend spec to resolve issue 87 18:27:27 Created ACTION-430 - Amend spec to resolve issue 87 [on John Boyer - due 2007-11-12]. 18:28:08 John: Appendix B.2 parent of new element 18:28:35 John: insert attribute, or child element, need to use (Eric) nodeset attribute 18:28:56 ..not using nodeset attribute, need to use context for that 18:29:22 if nodeset empty, context is used to insert parent context node 18:30:05 .. identify parent to identify attribbute from item 18:30:27 ..insert attribute before/after element 18:30:43 last node identified by nodeset 18:31:16 ...eliminated homogenous nodeset problem 18:31:34 ... disputing note for using the context attribute 18:31:46 ...to not be using nodeset 18:32:07 example is incorrect due to processing model for insert 18:32:40 ...looking at insert processing 18:33:08 ...what nodes copying, what nodes cloned -- they are from origin 18:33:28 ... here is where you put the newly cloned data 18:33:45 .. struck (e) lines in spec 18:34:18 other last call comments -- don't impose attribute order 18:34:29 Present+Raman 18:34:39 raman joins us 18:34:53 zakim, paul_revere_a also has Raman 18:34:53 +Raman; got it 18:35:52 On insertion, removed para, but added (a), (b) about when cloned node is an attribute 18:36:12 zakim, what is the code? 18:36:12 the conference code is 26631 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), klotz 18:36:19 +Leigh_Klotz 18:36:49 eric suggests remove (a), rely on part (8) target location due to node type conflict 18:37:09 if type conflict, noop anyway 18:37:23 consistent view of context attribute for insert 18:37:48 to identify element whose content space is used to insert something 18:38:01 nodeset is used to determine before and after for insertion 18:38:28 if special case (a) is removed 18:39:09 insert with nodeset and origin -- will perform no operation because it is attempting to insert before or after of content 18:39:26 correct way for example is to use context 18:39:53 Nick: should there be a testcase 18:40:05 John: several areas for step 8 to look at 18:40:32 Nick: implementations may have done this, so test case needed to catch 18:40:53 John: so we have to decide on this example 18:41:23 Charlie: not sure 18:41:41 John: we do something like this in other places 18:42:01 Raman: look at it more as data structure rather than XML 18:42:12 raman: changes perspective 18:42:46 Raman: data structures more interesting than XML structure 18:43:11 John: data model is built on data model 18:43:26 Charlie: a runtime error instead of noop 18:43:37 John: not an exception 18:43:42 John: we could 18:43:48 John: is binding exception 18:44:21 Nick: future feature, exploit 2.0 dispatches in runtime error 18:44:32 Charlie: why I was skeptical 18:44:43 Nick: remove nodeset 18:44:51 John: change nodeset to context 18:45:10 John: have to specify context, because no nodeset is a noop 18:45:22 Nick: write context dot 18:45:32 context=dot(.) 18:45:36 Charlie: ship it 18:45:50 John: reword 18:46:37 Resolve to eliminate special case target location processing for attributes and fix Example B.4 18:46:54 Nick: different versions of the spec 18:47:01 Nick: b becomes a 18:47:16 John: not had to make a separate version yet 18:47:58 Proposed Resolution: Resolve to eliminate special case target location processing for attributes and fix Example B.4 18:48:33 Action: JBoyer to do eliminate special case target location processing for attributes and fix Example B.4 18:48:33 Created ACTION-431 - Do eliminate special case target location processing for attributes and fix Example B.4 [on John Boyer - due 2007-11-12]. 18:49:05 RESOLUTION: Resolve to eliminate special case target location processing for attributes and fix Example B.4 18:49:17 rrsagent, make minutes 18:49:17 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/11/05-forms-minutes.html Steven 18:49:34 John: issue related to input mode with Martin 18:49:46 John: what to do to go to CR for this issue 18:49:56 John: waiting for update to list 18:50:11 John: go to CR and modify list later 18:50:42 John: go to CR and then modify afterwards to modify the input mode issue 18:51:01 Steven: yes 18:53:46 John: other than input modes issue all last call isues dealt with 18:53:54 John: 1000 diffs 18:54:10 446 diffs 18:54:20 from last call document 18:54:38 approaching 100 diffs 18:54:59 John: process issues tomorrow 18:55:07 John: resolve to exit last call 18:55:20 Raman: do it done 18:55:45 Steven: not appropriate until we have the spec 18:55:53 not informative 18:56:19 Raman: make it an informative appendix 18:56:52 Proposed Resolution: make input modes an informative appendix 18:57:32 Action: make input modes an informative appendix 18:57:32 Sorry, couldn't find user - make 18:57:45 Action: JBoyer to make input modes an informative appendix 18:57:45 Created ACTION-432 - Make input modes an informative appendix [on John Boyer - due 2007-11-12]. 18:58:20 John Scanning diffs 1.0 and 1.1 18:59:01 downside marking feature at risk -- opens comments 18:59:21 John: saying no featrures at risk, could end up with last call 19:00:08 RESOLUTION: make input modes an informative appendix 19:01:38 Steven: issue from Madrid local-date-time() vs now() 19:01:54 Steven: we didn't make a good decision 19:02:15 ... not obvious for authors 19:02:44 John: not new information 19:03:08 Steven: several people approached Steven on now() 19:03:33 John: end-of-day had to pick a way 19:04:04 John: recorded a (Resolution) on that 19:04:43 UTC version of now() 19:05:30 clarifying now, examples for locat-date-time, adjusting to time zone 19:06:13 John: talk about process issues tomorrow for 1.1 19:06:32 zakim, who is here? 19:06:32 On the phone I see Paul_revere_a, Leigh_Klotz 19:06:33 Paul_revere_a has Steven, John, Charlie, Nick, Keith, Raman 19:06:34 On IRC I see Charlie, klotz, Zakim, John_Boyer, wellsk, Nick, RRSAgent, Steven, trackbot-ng 19:07:04 John, go to next agenda -- xforms 1.2 19:07:40 John: 1.2 to be author simplification 19:08:53 Are we under a requirement for a 1.2? 19:09:09 Raman: better handle on what we need 19:09:17 for lazy authoring 19:09:28 ... xhtml 5 has xforms, clean bridge for lazy authoring 19:09:55 ... how to integrate into xhtml 5 spec 19:10:17 Charlie: what does it do to write guidelines? what is example? 19:10:53