See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2014
<clapierre1> Zakium 1.650.644 is me
<philm> Hi, Dave
<clapierre1> Zakium aabb is me
<pkra> pkra is +1.617.858.aahh
<scribe> scribenick: dauwhe
mgylling: objections to approving minutes?
clapierre: my name was mshouldbepelled in minutes
mgylling: one can edit minutes directly in IRC
Ivan: one word or two?
clapierre1: one
mgylling: Are minutes approved?
... yes.
... Topic: summer break
<fjh> some editing tips here, http://www.w3.org/2008/xmlsec/Group/Scribe-Instructions.html (members only link)
mgylling: should we have a summer break
during July?
... it would not prevent individual task force work
... any reactions?
<clapierre1> thanks
mgylling: suggestion was to start again on 11 August
<AH_Miller> I've took my vacation last week.
Julie: July and August are equally busy in
the US
... July is worse for me
mgylling: Liza, Ivan, what do you say?
<brady_duga> Sorry, I am having phone issues and on my commute to work, so I will have to drop and won’t be able to rejoin
<Luc> I'll be away beginning of August coming back after th 20th
mgylling: we could reconvene on Aug 11 as heartbeat check
Liam: some groups have editing review meetings--review docs on IRC
Ivan: during aug 11 heartbeat decide what to do
mgylling: we'll reconvene August 11
liza: a11y task force has been meeting
... would that be good topic for next week?
mgylling: Charles, do you think that would be a good topic?
charles: next Monday would be good for me.
Liza: let's do that.
<Karen> +1 Accessibility topic on 7 July
Ivan: herding stray phone numbers
<David_stroup> 585 David stroup
Markus: heavy sigh
mgylling: Peter, the idea is to get quality
time to understand STEM use cases work
... and to get suggestions you need.
... I don't have a plan for this
... I'd like to learn about the thinking and wiki work you've done so
far
pkra: I added a few more math-specific use
cases
... things like graphing and diagrams
... not sure which direction work should go
<tm> sorry I had lost my ADSL connection :-((
pkra: progressive enhancements fed into STEM
stuff
... user agent improvements
<ivan> Chemistry use case
<scribe> ... new standards like ChemML are in scope? Yes.
<ivan> Diagrams, Graphics Use cases
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: is mathml enough for
science?
... mathml may need work to support k-12
<Luc> Sorry cannot make it.
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: there were emails
<Bill_Kasdorf> actually it was MathML 3.0 that added the K-12 support
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: tcole brought up contacting
digital library of mathematics folks
... George K. added some notes on a11y pointed towards describedby and
other ARIA things
... that's what I've gathered so far
... my questions aabout scope
... how do web components work here?
... for chem there's ChemML that might be typical use case
... if platform doesn't already support these standards, could web
components help?
... where is the balance to be found?
... mathml is a good example. Is it a problem or poster child for web
standards?
... it's sucessfull on creation side
... it's the xml and html way of writing math
... but it's a huge problem because browsers haven't supported
... web components could solve some problems, but make it harder to
publish these materisals
<liam> [I believe safari has mathml support, and there's some mediocre support in firefox]
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: where to draw the line
between web components and standards work
... can we do everything in SVG? Yes, but it doesn't solve problems of
publishers.
mgylling: it's a valid question
... if we look at from use case perspective, you shouldn't have to worry
... the first thing we have to do is describe how publishers want to use
the OWP
... whether we have a name is the next question
... you can pretend to be ignorant about the solution space, and
describe the problelm space
... you have updated the toc in the use case directory?
pkra: yes
mgylling: it might sound like a dry,
academic answer to separate things like that
...: web folks doen't know what content folks want to do
... mathml is a good example. Great expectations among publishers,
nothing from web world
... if we say web components, we can answer every possible question
... lots of hype right now
... with a good amount of scripting and connectivity you can make things
loook like they are real
... declarative vs scripted
... should publishing give up on declaritive and go all-in for scripting
... so we'd just draw math on canvas and give up on mathml
... key issue is declarative vs scripted
timCole: one nuance... based on mathml experience, why would publisher see advanatage in using some of these technologies
<Zakim> liam, you wanted to point out that web components don't really address the problem
timCole: people ask why can't I use TeX
Liam: three things
... just two
... one: web components would address the markup issue, but we already
have mathml
... the difficult part is formatting
... so you either recreate mathjax
... there's nothing in CSS to do math formatting without a lot of work
... the other part is JATS
... which is used in STM publishing
... as opposed to STEM
... STM uses MathML extensively
<Bill_Kasdorf> and BITS is the book counterpart to JATS
clapierre1: on a11y we have to make sure we
don
... lose descriptive presentation for math
... we can't forget that
Bill_Kasdorf: there's now BITS: book
interchange tag suite
... Mathml is part of that
... declarative vs scripted. I'm on the declarative side
... here's something that's richly described, then scripting can do
something with that
... I have a preference for making available a resource that many things
can be done with
mgylling: I'm a big fan of declarative, as it helps with a11y, and the presentation can be negotiated with the user
<pbelfanti> must drop from call - regrets
mgylling: scripted stuff can have user
negotiation, but is more like black box
... it is a tricky question
... we can love declarative
... but if the cost and struggle to get something to work that way is
too high
... will the publishing community adopt?
Bill_Kasdorf: if it doesn't have support, it's not useful
Ivan: to comment on web components; I'm not
married to them
... I didn't mean to use web components for mathml
... I was wondering about chemistry or electronics
... on declarative vs scripted
... in an ideal world the reason I was wondering about it was exactly
that
... it gives the end user a way to extend the declarative part of html
who's behaviour is encoded in JS
... once those components are defined, the author would use the markup
in a declarative way
... and the component/script would do the presentation
... for example, with ChemML it's a way forward without brower support
for ChemML
... i don't know if web components are rich enough for these kinds of
uses
... but may be worth considering
mgylling: the setup you describe is not that different from MathML plus mathjax
pkra: I had understood it that way, Ivan. My
question came from Markus inviting me to not care about the solution
... I do believe web components will be useful
... my question: how do we combine this?
... what do we want from interesteed parties?
... our use case is going to be to use this markup but not as a web
standard, but as a web component standard
... how do we get the richest feedback?
mgylling: I think so
pkra: web platform offers everything with
mathml svg canvas, you'd have a really powerful base
... it comes down to making it usable
... what do we do on the standards side of this
... do we pick winners, identify the standards with the biggest market
... and combine that with ideas that can work as web components
mgylling: the pub community wants answers.
what should we focus on?
... big-time publishers still provide math as bitmap images
... not because they're ignorant but because it's the only thing that
works everywhere
... this IG can provide answers: you should use X for this problem
... another thought: the fact that web components exist doesn't matter
in most cases because publishers don't have the engineering staff
... that will feed into a preexisting web component taht would render
such content
<Bill_Kasdorf> +1
mgylling: it doesn't remove the need for standards, just changes where things are standardized, as a web component thing or as a markup language
Ivan: not either/or
... from author/editor POV, it looks clear that a declarative standard
is necessary.
... who would do that is separate question
... if I would do that today, the browsers will not just implement it by
themselves
... we've learned the lesson of MathML
... I'd look at another way of implementing
... web components might be another way of implementing something
... so these things can be done in parallel
... my question is still (for example with ChemML)
... is this doable with web components?
... it may be technically not feasible
... I don't know if that's true or false
... it would be very valuable to find out the answer
... I don't just don't want to believe that web components would solve,
in case they would't
... Peter, you may know this
<liam> [I note that today there's JavaScript to render CML in SVG]
Ivan: the reason why the browsers have not
implemented mathml is that they don't feel there's a market
... it's not a priority
... would a concentrated documentation of all the needs of the
publishing industry overall
... including scholarly publishing (and not just books)
... and bring in business figures to show how important this is
... would this help browsers change their mind?
mgylling: we should talk about who to reach out
Bill_Kasdorf: AAP implementation project,
Mathml was the highest priority from a11y people
... on the strategy of mathml plus canvas, I believe that just deals
with display issues
... and not interactive issues?
pkra: Yes
Bill_Kasdorf: another benefit of mathml is that it does both things
pkra: there's a bit of a gap here, there's
two separate standards
... content vs display
... presentation is already pretty rich, a11y tools can use
... there aren't authoring tools in content mathml
Bill_Kasdorf: presentational is the highest priority
pkra: it's easy to convert back and forth
... then you can talk about more advanced computation/display
<Zakim> liam, you wanted to discuss some people to whom to reach out to - CML: peter Murray-Rust (of course); STM publishing: http://www.stm-assoc.org/ and others; mathml semantic tools
pkra: I've given up trying to understand
vendors
... lots of interest on browser implemtation side, just not enough to
get the ball rolling
... I agree with ivan, making the business case would help
... and that's not just for mathml
mgylling: that should be the ambition of the
use cases
... let's just describe what publishers want to do
<liam> [some people to whom to reach out - CML: peter Murray-Rust (of course); STM publishing: http://www.stm-assoc.org/ and others; mathml semantic tools will happen, e.g. from maple, wulfram, if needed ]
Liam: who to reach out to?
... someone mentioned CML, Peter Murray-Rust; there's an association of
STM publishers
... Maple and Wolfram are market leaders for software
<pkra> add sagemath, iPython.
<clapierre1> Happy Canada Day (tomorrow July 1) :)
Liam: if publishing world said we need this, there are people with authoring tools
<liam> [merci]
Bill_Kasdorf: Two more... I can get people from SSP folks
<AH_Miller> How about Design Science and the work being done by Frédéric Wang?
Bill_Kasdorf: also Design Science
<liam> +1 Design Science
Liam: they also make word plugins
mgylling: the idea would be to grow use case collection
<AH_Miller> Frédéric Wang has been working on MathML for Gecko and WebKit.
mgylling: not only to convince browsers
about mathml
... but to grow the whole world of scholarly publishing
... and we invite feedback from more people
... do you have things to add to existing use case collection?
pkra: I have some rough ideas but there's
not a list
... let's reach out to everyone to get ideas
... two things: who's working on the task force?
... Tim Cole is interested
... especially on non-math stuff
... engineering has many higher needs
Bill_Kasdorf: I'd be happy to help, I have lots of contacts
timCole: I have lots of contacts, too.
Ivan: before we go, one more comment
... Madi and Bill did lots of interviews with people in the space
... which would be synthesized into a document
... something similar would be helpful here
... since we want a "business plan"
... backing that up with major players and companies gives it more
weight
... so you might want to look at what bill and Madi did as an example
Bill_Kasdorf: it's all on the wiki now
mgylling: it's a good way to gather data
... it does take time, though
Ivan: Force 11 is looking at scholarly publishing
pkra: Summary: I'm in a good place right
now; I have a lot go through
... can plan what you're describing, and come back with more use cases
etc
mgylling: sounds good to me
<clapierre1> yes
mgylling: we're over time. Any final comments?