ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 N416

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34 N0416

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34

Information Technology --

Document Description and Processing Languages

Title:	Report on WG1 Meeting in London, May 2003
Source:	WG1 Convenor, JTC1/SC34
Project:	All SC34 Projects
Project editor:	Martin Bryan
Status:
Action:	For information only
Date:	5th May 2003
Summary:
Distribution:	SC34 and Liaisons
Refer to:
Supercedes:
Reply to:	Dr. James David Mason (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 Chairman) Y-12 National Security Complex Information Technology Services Bldg. 9113 M.S. 8208 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8208 U.S.A. Telephone: +1 423 574-6973 Facsimile: +1 423 574-1896 E-mailk: mailto:[email protected] http://www.y12.doe.gov/sgml/sc34/sc34oldhome.htm Ms. Sara Hafele, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 Secretariat American National Standards Institute 11 West 42nd Street New York, NY 10036 Tel: +1 212 642 4976 Fax: +1 212 840 2298 E-mail: [email protected]

Minutes of SC34/WG1 Meeting, London May 3rd & 4th 2003

Present:
    Martin Bryan
    Ann Wrightson *
    Eric Van der Vlist
    Murata Makoto
    Lynne Price *

* Not present for all of meeting

The meeting convened at 10.45am on 3rd May and ended at 4pm on 4th May.

It was felt that it would be confusing to have Part 0 and Part1 as a single part. It would also be confusing to change the number of Part 2 as it may already have been referenced elsewhere using the original part number. Therefore it was agreed to renumber Part 0 as Part 1 and Part 1 as Part 10, changing the name of. Part 10 to Validation Management.

Part 0 comment resolution was agreed:

Japanese comment regarding the need to reference UCS as ISO/IEC 10646 throughout is accepted
Scope needs to be extended to cover points currently raised in the introduction, including the list and para 4, in line with comments made in UK briefing document.

The committee accepted Joshua Lubell's suggestions that the AFDR functionality be included in Part 8, but noted that the processing rules for DSDL/RELAX NG would need to be re-expressed in XML instance format, though the results of the processes should be the same as if AFDR had been used to validate architectural forms defined as part of element and attribute declarations in a DTD. The name "Flexible Schema Reuse" was not considered to be useful: the committee felt that the part should be renamed as "Declarative Document Architectures".

Japanese comments of CD for Part 4 are more about James Clarke's Modular Namespaces (MNS) proposal than the original CD. Their first comment that MNS be adopted as the basis for the the next CD draft was accepted and the Japanese comments to MNS, including five not included in the CD ballot, were discussed. The editor is to prepare a disposition of comments for the Japanese and UK comments. These are to be discussed further on the DSDL discussion list and a new FCD prepared for balloting within ISO. The new text should be structured according to ISO rules, e.g. starting with a scope statement and a list of referenced standards.

If ISO 9573 entity sets are updated not only the maths sets need to be updated, but all the 9573 entity sets. The versions based on conversion to Unicode character numbers would need to have differentiating public identifiers, but could use the same entity names to reference the sets. The new versions should also be given URI-based system identifiers to ensure compatibility within XML-based systems.

The "outie" proposal for the XML Validation Interoperability Framework was reviewed as a mechanism for DSDL Validation Management (Part 10). The proposal was generally approved, though with some minor suggestions for improvement. Text is to be converted to format suitable for submission as ISO CD. Rick Jelliffe's e-mail relating to namespace processing was considered to be the result of a misunderstanding that has since been corrected.

The comments on the working group's evaluation of the shortcomings of W3C's existing datatype definitions for XML are to be submitted to the W3C datatype group. Those comments not taken note of by W3C then they should be incorporated into Part 5: Datatypes of DSDL. This specification should also:

provide namespace identifiers for POSIX and ISO 11404.
consider endorsing the proposed XForms subset when it is standardized in next 6 months.

National bodies should be invited to propose set of primitives and extension methods within next 6 month. Eric van der List is to work on a proposal for minimal set of data lexical spaces with derivation as part of this work. We should also consider the possibility asking national bodies to drop this Part as unnecessary in that Part 2 already contains functionality for allowing any existing datatype definition to be used to control the contents of any existing or future datatype specification.

For Part 3: Rule-based Validations we need to find out why no CD has been prepared by editor.

Nothing has been done on Part 6: Path-based integrity constraints so far. Murata Makoto is to try to draft a first draft that will act as a strawman to stimulate discussion in this area . He will send to editor James Clarke for further discussion.

A new editor will be required for Part 7 if Dederick Gerth cannot be persuaded to submit some text. It must be possible to restrict characters within specific elements and within attribute values.

An editor needs to be identified for Part 9: Namespace and datatype aware DTDs. The proposal on Datatypes for DTDs (DT4DTD) should be considered as the mechanisms for datatype specification.