See also: IRC log
<tzviya> https://www.w3.org/2016/10/03-dpub-minutes.html
Minutes: no comments
Minutes approved
Ivan: message from Karen
reminder to join Felix at Franfurt bookfair booth
<ivan> https://www.w3.org/2016/10/W3CPosteratFrankfurt2016.pdf
small slider : call for comment
next week : meeting cancelled
24th October next meeting
<garth> https://rawgit.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/dedupe/index.html
<tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/tree/dedupe
<scribe> New branch for UCR docuement from Leonard
Leonard: goal of that branch : remove duplicates
and cleaning, merging related things
grammar cleaning, phrases tagged in issue tracker
nothing controversial added, and not in my own opinions
ivan raised issues, let’s start with
ivan: general things, requirements very close or identical
Leonard added Ivan suggestions
<tzviya> ivan's comments: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2016Oct/0089.html
ivan: to be discussed : issue on versioning 4.1
didn’t understand the first phrase
what do we mean by « versioning »?
<tzviya> https://rawgit.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/dedupe/index.html#distro-vers
in section 4.1 Distribution and Versioning
version as a publisher.
Leonard: another issue with archiving versioning
<Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to consider distribution and versioning as separate issues
Tzviya: publisher need to update a book an development language because a new release
in digital publication, no new publication for that, a minor update just editing a minor version number
<ayla_stein> Agreed
BillK: separate versioning from distribution
in archiving, an authoritative version is important
<ayla_stein> +1 Bill
Leonard: minor updates doesn’t change the canonical identifier but a change of a chapter change the identifier
<tzviya> in scientific publishing, the version of record is very important
BillK: 2 classes of changes : updates and corrections
Leonard: versioning and uniqueness from a publisher point of view
Tzviya: several point of view on that subject among publishers
Ivan: separate between changes done by the publishers from annotation, but identical from the user’s point of view
terms meaning different things in the community
for instance : a new version in CSV, in Git
Tzviya: same issue also on updates and corrections
Ivan: req 18 : does not make sense
Leonard: see also 3.8 that sorts it
<ayla_stein> would it be possible to have definitions of "version" in different sections of the document?
Ivan: there should be a way of tracking changes
BillK: a stable ID that doesn’t change in EPUB across minor correction, plus a time stamp
Ivan: it goes to implementation direction
BillK: is it the same thing?
<rdeltour> rdeltour: can we use the word "edition"?
Tzviya: we need the word version to something else
Ivan: do we need to keep 4.1?
BillK: versioning is done elsewhere?
Ivan: essentialy « I should be able to track changes »
Romain: « track changes » mean a lot in software dev
can we use teh word « edition » ?
Tzviya: means a lot 2
Garth: package version isn’t changed by the distribution
Brady: doesn’t matter if all is in the same package
<ayla_stein> so maybe the method of distribution?
<HeatherF> a publisher, a librarian, or a standards developer
Leonard to fix versioning
current examples: 2 and 3, do we agree they stand in the same area?
BillK: example 3 contains two separate issues
Ivan: the 2nd work if we mean what Garth said
Leonard: they don’t say anything on package
Passing along isn’t necessarily in the package way
Tzviya: keep these 2 examples to be rewritten
Ivan: one more thing in referencing to schema.org
For accessibility metadata
George or Romain: shema.org vocabulary
Charles: it is in progress
Avneesh: formal definition in the wiki page
<clapierre> Here are the other two pending accessibility Pending metadata properties. https://pending.schema.org/accessibilitySummary and https://pending.schema.org/accessModeSufficient
Leonard: some clean up in the next round
... definition of a PWP? Portable or Packaged
ivan: Web publication and Packaged Web Publication? in the minutes of TPAC meeting
<HeatherF> second day more than the first
Garth: in the second day
<HeatherF> first day was sort of hashing things out, second day was bringing it all together.
<ivan> "A Web Publication is a collection of one or more Web resources in standard formats, organized together into a uniquely identifiable grouping."
Ivan: workng definitions (see link above)
<leonardr> +1 to @ivan
Leonard: great def, we want also games
Tzviya: hope for a very broad umbrella spec, and also EPUB4 in it
Ivan: that introduction can be used as a start
Leonard: next issue capabilities of discovery under security
permission APIs, preserving integrity
Dave: section 2.6 on collections, usage examples not clear that it describes collection of Web collections
just collecting some stuff
Leonard: old version « bunch of stuff organised together"
conceptual publication gathered together
Now in a logical unit
Dave: the 2nd usage, multiple paths to the publication
Ivan: is it a fundamental req?
open the door to meta publication
Tzviya: this was the issue I wanted to raise
We need to clarify what that means
Dave: metadata between the pub and the content itself
Leanard: from the doc perspective : combining multiple sources together to a new document
BiilK: fundamental definition : publication is a resource of resources
Ivan: this is part of the production of a publication
nuke the whole thing
<leonardr> I agree with @Bill_Kasdorf and @Ivan - a publication is just another type of resource. And would be fine nuking the section.
Dave: individual items need to be a publication?
BillK it can be but not necessarily
Dave: complication will be a mess
Ivan: nuclear option
<clapierre> +1 Nuke it
<garth> Remove section 2.6
Tzviay metadata associated with sub resources
<HeatherF> Yay for Leonard!
Tzviya: thank you Leonard!
<leonardr> you are welcome.
Tzviya: document reorg
<leonardr> yes, some of them are very good, @Ivan
Ivan: one more task to do
discussion with Marcos, « there is a use case we should add »
example: for the packaged version, a way to ensure integrity of the package
after Heather is done with the cleanup
Heather: get started this week, something for the 24
Ivan: merging Leonard branch is the simplest thing to do
Tzviya: Charles any objection
Charles: i’ll take a look after the merge
Leonard: i’ll do it
Ivan: we will ping Marcos when the doc is in review
<ivan> trackbot, end telcon