Brief   Full   Jump  

Small
Medium
Large

Teal
High contrast
Bluish
Black

Sans-serif
Serif
Monospaced
Close
d
?
Styles

"Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??

18 messages.

"Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 00:31:29 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 00:32:06 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org
Copied to: bmccoy@idpf.org.

In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? Thanks, Leonard
Fwd: [Moderator Action] Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Ivan Herman   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 06:47:32 +0200

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 04:47:43 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org.

Forwarding... > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Bill McCoy <whmccoy@gmail.com> > Subject: [Moderator Action] Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > Date: 13 Aug 2015 03:06:31 CEST > To: Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> > Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>, Bill McCoy <bmccoy@idpf.org> > X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 > > I would suggest people also consider and opine about a related attribute to completeness/self-containedness (that publication resources live inside an actual or virtual package file)... what we might call "idempotency" (that publication resources don't change dynamically). To me this is fundamental to what a "portable document" means vs. arbitrary OWP content, and it is orthogonal to whether content is packaged or not (which Id don't see as fundamental to portable document-ness). In a cloud reader view of a publication (such as: http://idpf.org/sites/default/files/cloud-reader/index.html?epub=epub_content%2Faccessible_epub_3 <http://idpf.org/sites/default/files/cloud-reader/index.html?epub=epub_content%2Faccessible_epub_3>) a user may not know or care whether the content was packaged into a single file or not. > > To me what fundamentally distinguishes portable documents from arbitrary websites is solely that portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity. > > In terms of the REST architecture of the Web, portable documents always have resource=representation, vs. arbitrary websites in which resources (URIs/URLs) are free to return different representations at different times. Interactivity is possible, but only via the code-on-demand feature of the REST architecture. > > This property makes things like archival and annotations straightforward to do with portable documents, whereas things things are impossible, in the general case, with websites (how can I archive or annotate expedia.com <http://expedia.com/>, which is personalized to me and whose functionality is dynamic and embodied in a bunch of server infrastructure?). > > I don't see idempotency as a black/white attribute, especially as we get into things like advertising in digital publications, but to me the more something has this property the more I'm inclined to think of it as a "portable document" in nature, the less it has the property the more I'm inclined to think of it as being more general "Web stuff". It is related to packaging in that if content is fully packaged it ipso facto also has the idempotency attribute (but the converse does not hold). To evolve today's EPUB into being a full solution for "portable documents for the Web" it seems pretty clear to me that we'll need to both untangle these two attributes and better explore the "gray area" of content that is partially but not completely idempotent (which is not necessarily equivalent to being partially packaged). > > --Bill > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com <mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: > In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > > EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). > > While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > > In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > > I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. > > What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? > > Thanks, > Leonard > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Ivan Herman   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 06:55:10 +0200

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 04:55:21 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: lrosenth@adobe.com
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Leonard, good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". I think that Bill's answer[1]: "portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this point either:-( Thanks Ivan [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.html [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > > In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > >> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >> > While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > > In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > > I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. > > What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? > > Thanks, > Leonard > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill McCoy   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:09:01 +0200

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 06:09:12 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: lrosenth@adobe.com.

I would suggest people also consider and opine about a related attribute to completeness/self-containedness (that publication resources live inside an actual or virtual package file)... what we might call "idempotency" (that publication resources don't change dynamically). To me this is fundamental to what a "portable document" means vs. arbitrary OWP content, and it is orthogonal to whether content is packaged or not (which Id don't see as fundamental to portable document-ness). In a cloud reader view of a publication (such as: http://idpf.org/sites/default/files/cloud-reader/index.html?epub=epub_content%2Faccessible_epub_3 <http://idpf.org/sites/default/files/cloud-reader/index.html?epub=epub_content%2Faccessible_epub_3>) a user may not know or care whether the content was packaged into a single file or not. To me what fundamentally distinguishes portable documents from arbitrary websites is solely that portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity. In terms of the REST architecture of the Web, portable documents always have resource=representation, vs. arbitrary websites in which resources (URIs/URLs) are free to return different representations at different times. Interactivity is possible, but only via the code-on-demand feature of the REST architecture. This property makes things like archival and annotations straightforward to do with portable documents, whereas things things are impossible, in the general case, with websites (how can I archive or annotate expedia.com <http://expedia.com/>, which is personalized to me and whose functionality is dynamic and embodied in a bunch of server infrastructure?). I don't see idempotency as a black/white attribute, especially as we get into things like advertising in digital publications, but to me the more something has this property the more I'm inclined to think of it as a "portable document" in nature, the less it has the property the more I'm inclined to think of it as being more general "Web stuff". It is related to packaging in that if content is fully packaged it ipso facto also has the idempotency attribute (but the converse does not hold). To evolve today's EPUB into being a full solution for "portable documents for the Web" it seems pretty clear to me that we'll need to both untangle these two attributes and better explore the "gray area" of content that is partially but not completely idempotent (which is not necessarily equivalent to being partially packaged). --Bill On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com <mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? Thanks, Leonard
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:27:31 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 13:28:13 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: whmccoy@gmail.com
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

I absolutely agree, Bill. Idempotency is again another axis of consideration in the differences between a document and a package of arbitrary (OWP or otherwise) content. Certainly there will be packages that require either side of this – and in some unique cases – both types in a single package. I also think that these distinctions will come into play very heavily as we look at the intermediate state of “cached”. Is a cached file always fully idempotent? Can you have a partial cache? Can the author specify what should (or should not) be cached – and then how does that impact it’s “completeness”? (etc.) Leonard From: Bill McCoy Date: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 9:06 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG, Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I would suggest people also consider and opine about a related attribute to completeness/self-containedness (that publication resources live inside an actual or virtual package file)... what we might call "idempotency" (that publication resources don't change dynamically). To me this is fundamental to what a "portable document" means vs. arbitrary OWP content, and it is orthogonal to whether content is packaged or not (which Id don't see as fundamental to portable document-ness). In a cloud reader view of a publication (such as: http://idpf.org/sites/default/files/cloud-reader/index.html?epub=epub_content%2Faccessible_epub_3) a user may not know or care whether the content was packaged into a single file or not. To me what fundamentally distinguishes portable documents from arbitrary websites is solely that portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity. In terms of the REST architecture of the Web, portable documents always have resource=representation, vs. arbitrary websites in which resources (URIs/URLs) are free to return different representations at different times. Interactivity is possible, but only via the code-on-demand feature of the REST architecture. This property makes things like archival and annotations straightforward to do with portable documents, whereas things things are impossible, in the general case, with websites (how can I archive or annotate expedia.com<http://expedia.com>, which is personalized to me and whose functionality is dynamic and embodied in a bunch of server infrastructure?). I don't see idempotency as a black/white attribute, especially as we get into things like advertising in digital publications, but to me the more something has this property the more I'm inclined to think of it as a "portable document" in nature, the less it has the property the more I'm inclined to think of it as being more general "Web stuff". It is related to packaging in that if content is fully packaged it ipso facto also has the idempotency attribute (but the converse does not hold). To evolve today's EPUB into being a full solution for "portable documents for the Web" it seems pretty clear to me that we'll need to both untangle these two attributes and better explore the "gray area" of content that is partially but not completely idempotent (which is not necessarily equivalent to being partially packaged). --Bill On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? Thanks, Leonard
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
"Belfanti, Paul"   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:04:16 -0400

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 15:05:21 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: ivan@w3.org
Copied to: lrosenth@adobe.com, public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Another example from the learning space is that ability to link out to an external grade card server to capture data from problems/homework assignments in an eTextbook, with the further online/offline requirement that those results be cached if no external connection exists, to be synched once one is reestablished. *Paul* -- Paul Belfanti Director, Content Architecture Core Platforms & Enterprise Architecture office: +1 201-236-7746 mobile: +1 201-783-4884 On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Leonard, > > good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a > need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic > publication as an example, such a publication may include references to > other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too > large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the > hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not > meant to be "fully self-contained". > > I think that Bill's answer[1]: > > "portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without > respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without > such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > > what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by > Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this > point either:-( > > Thanks > > Ivan > > [1] > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.html > [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > > > On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks > for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > > > >> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content > that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties > of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that > other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and > present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging > the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same > content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). > >> > > While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am > going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully > self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, > feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > > > > In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire > by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly > key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF > subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF > use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for > example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional > workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a > portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for > external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > > > > I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the > past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the > same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. > Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM > publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS > library used by the publication. > > > > What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a > requirement in a POW? > > > > Thanks, > > Leonard > > > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C > Digital Publishing Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > > >
RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill Kasdorf   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:38:45 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 15:39:46 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: ivan@w3.org, lrosenth@adobe.com
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid reflexively thinking "books.") --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM To: Leonard Rosenthol Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? Leonard, good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". I think that Bill's answer[1]: "portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this point either:-( Thanks Ivan [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.html [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > > In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > >> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >> > While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > > In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > > I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. > > What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? > > Thanks, > Leonard > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:29:58 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 18:30:30 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, ivan@w3.org
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.html >[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153 >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill Kasdorf   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 18:59:56 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:00:27 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: lrosenth@adobe.com, ivan@w3.org
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153 >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill McCoy   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 12:00:39 -0700

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:01:31 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: lrosenth@adobe.com
Copied to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org.

I agree with Leonard that this is not black and white. But maybe it would be helpful to tease apart the concepts of "portable" from "document"/"publication"... it might be interesting to consider whether there is anything that distinguishes app-ness from document-ness independent of the vector of portability and what that implies for the nature of dynamic content embedded within a publication. My "idempotency" suggestion (and like Ivan I don't necessarily believe this is the best term, I was just searching for something to concisely capture the resource=representation constraint vs. full REST architecture) is really not about document-ness it's about portability. It could, perhaps, be considered to have some relation to "publication" if the verb sense of that word is implied (i.e. a "publication" could be distinguished from a "document" by the act of publishing, which has a significance in re: idempotency). Anyway I believe we can in principle have portable apps as well as portable documents.. For a counter-example, the biggest showcase for "HTML5" - at least in the eyes of my 12-year-old - is agar.io, something that in the past would have required Flash or a native app but now he can play on any device that has a browser. But all the logic of agar.io is on the server side, the client side seems to a rather dumb pipe... it's a credit to OWP that it can be responsive enough for this MMOG but it would be rather senseless to imagine archiving it so it is in no sense a "portable" app experience. OTOH one could in principle imagine a radically different version of agar.io where all the logic was client-side and you could play offline against bots and, perhaps, optionally online against humans... aka it would be portable.. So I think that a fully portable document/publication should be expected to have the transitive property of portability. That is to say, all its components (like quizzes) should themselves be portable. The less this is true the less we can consider the overall publication to be a portable document and the more it is a website (i.e. full REST architecture, including that resources are != representations). Caching to me is a tricky thing to try to mix in to this taxonomy. A cache is a temporally-limited thing, and one which may not always be accurate... i.e. it is not absolutely guaranteed that the cached representation previously returned by a resource is identical to the representation that would be provided in answer to a new request. Fundamentally the role of HTTP caching is to optimize real-time network throughput not to make permanent promises about the nature of the content... and browser caching in particular has many tricky aspects. I think one reason the original HTML5 offline support got into trouble was its attempt to build on the browser cache. --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you > make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is > presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived > from that data. > > Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a > stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact > the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the > publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a > textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t > available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue.. > > Leonard > > > > On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: > > >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external > publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article > (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the > publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are > part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > > > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to > distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" > vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > > > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches > up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from > other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > > > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the publication > complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to consider it > incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if they are not > actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable version of the > publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the external content > has been cached. This is _very_ important for publications like magazines > and news publications. (Be careful to avoid reflexively thinking "books.") > > > >--Bill K > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] > >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM > >To: Leonard Rosenthol > >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy > >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > > > >Leonard, > > > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a > need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic > publication as an example, such a publication may include references to > other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too > large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the > hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not > meant to be "fully self-contained". > > > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > > > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without > respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without > such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > > > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by > Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this > point either:-( > > > >Thanks > > > >Ivan > > > >[1] > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.html > >[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > > > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> > wrote: > >> > >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks > for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > >> > >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content > that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties > of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that > other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and > present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging > the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same > content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). > >>> > >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am > going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully > self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, > feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > >> > >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire > by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly > key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF > subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF > use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for > example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional > workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a > portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for > external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > >> > >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the > past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the > same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. > Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM > publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS > library used by the publication. > >> > >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a > requirement in a POW? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Leonard > >> > > > > > >---- > >Ivan Herman, W3C > >Digital Publishing Activity Lead > >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > >mobile: +31-641044153 > >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > > > > > > >
RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
"Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken"   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:16:49 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:18:14 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, lrosenth@adobe.com, ivan@w3.org
Copied to: public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884 tsiegman@wiley.com -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153 >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill McCoy   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 12:25:55 -0700

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:26:24 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: tsiegman@wiley.com
Copied to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, lrosenth@adobe.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org.

proposed concrete definition: **portable** (in Web context) means: *does not require active serverinfrastructure*. or to state it another way, **portable** means that *all programmatic elementsare part of and execute in the context of the content* ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken < tsiegman@wiley.com> wrote: > As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by > "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." > That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" > > +100 > > Tzviya Siegman > Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead > Wiley > 201-748-6884 > tsiegman@wiley.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM > To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman > Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy > Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > > The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," > in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's > accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the > current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the > quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers > provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a > widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of > the publication, but the answers not to be. > > Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact > go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So > in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external > resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the > publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks > because that appears to me to be the true edge case. > > If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that > provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a > question. > > What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be > "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical > in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading > me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable > for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources > might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike > folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point > out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly > in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is > fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem > reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same > publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. > > And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, > which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains > the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which > then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and > when they are not. > > It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one > of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics > without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want > to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the > concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that > it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, > magazines, etc. > > As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by > "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." > That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) > > --Bill K > > -----Original Message----- > From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM > To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman > Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy > Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > > I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you > make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is > presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived > from that data. > > Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a > stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact > the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the > publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a > textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t > available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. > > Leonard > > > > On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: > > >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external > publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article > (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the > publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are > part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > > > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to > distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" > vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > > > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches > up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from > other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > > > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the > >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to > >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if > >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable > >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the > >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for > >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid > >reflexively thinking "books.") > > > >--Bill K > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] > >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM > >To: Leonard Rosenthol > >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy > >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > > > >Leonard, > > > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a > need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic > publication as an example, such a publication may include references to > other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too > large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the > hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not > meant to be "fully self-contained". > > > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > > > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without > respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without > such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > > > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by > >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this > >point either:-( > > > >Thanks > > > >Ivan > > > >[1] > >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm > >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > > > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> > wrote: > >> > >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks > for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: > >> > >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content > that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties > of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that > other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and > present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging > the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same > content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). > >>> > >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am > going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully > self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, > feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). > >> > >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire > by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly > key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF > subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF > use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for > example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional > workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a > portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for > external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. > >> > >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the > past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the > same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. > Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM > publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS > library used by the publication. > >> > >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a > requirement in a POW? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Leonard > >> > > > > > >---- > >Ivan Herman, W3C > >Digital Publishing Activity Lead > >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > >mobile: +31-641044153 > >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > > > > > > >
RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
"Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken"   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:26:59 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:31:58 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: whmccoy@gmail.com
Copied to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, lrosenth@adobe.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Hi Bill, Any thoughts to add to our document about Web Publication and Packaging [1] in which we talk about different states of a publication? [1] https://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/Requirements_for_Web_Publication_and_Packaging Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884 tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> From: Bill McCoy [mailto:whmccoy@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:24 PM To: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken Cc: Bill Kasdorf; Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman; W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? proposed concrete definition: portable (in Web context) means: does not require active server infrastructure. or to state it another way, portable means that all programmatic elements are part of and execute in the context of the content ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote: As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884<tel:201-748-6884> tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill Kasdorf   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:27:47 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 19:28:19 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: whmccoy@gmail.com, tsiegman@wiley.com
Copied to: lrosenth@adobe.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

We had also mentioned including "does not require a particular browser or browser cache" in the definition. Would that still be good to include? --Bill ak From: Bill McCoy [mailto:whmccoy@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:24 PM To: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken Cc: Bill Kasdorf; Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman; W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? proposed concrete definition: portable (in Web context) means: does not require active server infrastructure. or to state it another way, portable means that all programmatic elements are part of and execute in the context of the content ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote: As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884<tel:201-748-6884> tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:46:21 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 21:46:58 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: whmccoy@gmail.com, tsiegman@wiley.com
Copied to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Sorry but I have to disagree with these definitions, based on actual user requirements (at least users we’ve talked to). Portable means that all resources are defined. That I don’t need anything else to understand the structure of the content. However it does not mean that these resources are all available (or up to date) at any given time. Let me use a common PDF case – fonts. In PDF, all fonts must be declared BUT the actual font data need not be embedded into the document and instead is provided by the “RS” at runtime. While we might prefer a document that has all fonts embedded, even w/o them the document is portable. Programmatic elements are a completely different ballgame, IMO, and have no bearing on the definition of portability. To me it doesn’t matter if a script (that itself is embedded in the package) refers to embedded information or external information AS LONG AS the referencing of that information is via a pre-declared reference. Leonard From: Bill McCoy Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 3:24 PM To: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" Cc: Bill Kasdorf, Leonard Rosenthol, Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing IG, Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? proposed concrete definition: portable (in Web context) means: does not require active server infrastructure. or to state it another way, portable means that all programmatic elements are part of and execute in the context of the content ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote: As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884<tel:201-748-6884> tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 21:47:28 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 21:48:04 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, whmccoy@gmail.com, tsiegman@wiley.com
Copied to: ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org, bmccoy@idpf.org.

Browser and browser cache aren’t, IMO, appropriate terms to be using here. Using a generic concept of “reading system” or “user agent” would seem to make more sense since it removes any specific implementation and avoids confusion. Leonard From: Bill Kasdorf Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 3:27 PM To: Bill McCoy, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" Cc: Leonard Rosenthol, Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing IG, Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? We had also mentioned including "does not require a particular browser or browser cache" in the definition. Would that still be good to include? --Bill ak From: Bill McCoy [mailto:whmccoy@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:24 PM To: Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken Cc: Bill Kasdorf; Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman; W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? proposed concrete definition: portable (in Web context) means: does not require active server infrastructure. or to state it another way, portable means that all programmatic elements are part of and execute in the context of the content ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote: As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884<tel:201-748-6884> tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Bill McCoy   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 15:25:17 -0700

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 22:25:46 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: lrosenth@adobe.com
Copied to: whmccoy@gmail.com, tsiegman@wiley.com, bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org.

Leonard, I thought you and I agreed that "portability" was a spectrum not black-and-white. On that spectrum, missing fonts to me obviously decreases the portability of content, to a degree that is dependent on the nature of the content and font, and how uniquely specified the required font is (if a URI/URL to find it then that is not "missing" so much as "unpackaged"). This is critical because a missing Amharic font or even more so a missing Japanese font containing user gaiji, is highly likely to render a document unreadable by most people on most systems, so could be considered a significant "ding" on portability. This is one way in which today's EPUB differs from arbitrary OWP content, in that we have conformance requirements that limit define "Publication Resources" to include all resources (including fonts) where "In the absence of this resource, the EPUB Publication might not render as intended by the Author", and require that "All Publication Resources must be listed in the Package Document (as defined in manifest), adhere to the constraints for Core Media Types and Fallback and be located as per Publication Resource Locations." So to me your font example supports my proposed definition of "portable" even though I agree with you that a missing font is not always a fatal blow to portability. As far as scripting, maybe I wasn't communicating clearly as I'm not sure we disagree. I think it's consistent with the abstract definition of portability to have an external reference to a script or data in a portable publication, so long as there's a strong "promise" in some manner that that result of an HTTP request to the resource (referenced by URI/URL) will always return the same representation. If OTOH the external reference is to a Perl program on a server that returns different data/script content depending on say the phase of the moon, then such an external reference is not portable. It is this fundamental attribute of the REST architecture of the Web (the distinction between resource and the infinity of different representations that a request to that resource might possibly return) that makes it possible for the online Web change so quickly, but that same attribute is antithetical to portability. My mentioning of browser cache was just a side note, just to indicate my concern that the kind of "promise" I refer to above can't be considered to be reliably made via HTTP cache-control headers. BTW I believe here in W3C ;-) the right term to use is "User Agent" not "Reading System" and there is also an argument to be made that EPUB should adjust its current terminology as it evolves towards closer alignment with the overall OWP (unless W3C prefers that different instantiations of Web Technologies should stick with distinct terms, for example "User Agent" for browser instantiations, "Reading System" for standalone publication instantiations, and "Application" for installed applications based on Web technologies)... but maybe it could be better to have "User Agent" mean any instantiation of OWP, and pick a more descriptive term for the browser-specific instantiation). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> wrote: > Sorry but I have to disagree with these definitions, based on actual user > requirements (at least users we’ve talked to). > > Portable means that all resources are defined. That I don’t need anything > else to understand the structure of the content. > However it does not mean that these resources are all available (or up to > date) at any given time. Let me use a common PDF case – fonts. In PDF, > all fonts must be declared BUT the actual font data need not be embedded > into the document and instead is provided by the “RS” at runtime. While > we might prefer a document that has all fonts embedded, even w/o them the > document is portable. > > Programmatic elements are a completely different ballgame, IMO, and have > no bearing on the definition of portability. To me it doesn’t matter if a > script (that itself is embedded in the package) refers to embedded > information or external information AS LONG AS the referencing of that > information is via a pre-declared reference. > > Leonard > > From: Bill McCoy > Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 3:24 PM > To: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" > Cc: Bill Kasdorf, Leonard Rosenthol, Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing > IG, Bill McCoy > > Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > > proposed concrete definition: > > *portable* (in Web context) means: does not require active server > infrastructure. > > or to state it another way, *portable* means that all programmatic > elements are part of and execute in the context of the content > ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). > > --Bill > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken < > tsiegman@wiley.com> wrote: > >> As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by >> "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." >> That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" >> >> +100 >> >> Tzviya Siegman >> Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead >> Wiley >> 201-748-6884 >> tsiegman@wiley.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com] >> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM >> To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman >> Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >> Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? >> >> The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering >> "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every >> time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the >> current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the >> quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers >> provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a >> widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of >> the publication, but the answers not to be. >> >> Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact >> go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So >> in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external >> resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the >> publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks >> because that appears to me to be the true edge case. >> >> If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that >> provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a >> question. >> >> What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be >> "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical >> in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading >> me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable >> for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources >> might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike >> folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point >> out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly >> in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is >> fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem >> reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same >> publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. >> >> And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I >> started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it >> contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray >> area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the >> publication and when they are not. >> >> It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one >> of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics >> without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want >> to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the >> concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that >> it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, >> magazines, etc. >> >> As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by >> "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." >> That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) >> >> --Bill K >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com] >> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM >> To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman >> Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >> Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? >> >> I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you >> make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is >> presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived >> from that data. >> >> Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a >> stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact >> the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the >> publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a >> textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t >> available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. >> >> Leonard >> >> >> >> On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: >> >> >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external >> publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article >> (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the >> publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are >> part of the publication; the cited resources are not. >> > >> >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to >> distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" >> vs. "the publication and everything else it references." >> > >> >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches >> up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from >> other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). >> > >> >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >> >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >> >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >> >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >> >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >> >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >> >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >> >reflexively thinking "books.") >> > >> >--Bill K >> > >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org] >> >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >> >To: Leonard Rosenthol >> >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >> >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? >> > >> >Leonard, >> > >> >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a >> need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic >> publication as an example, such a publication may include references to >> other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too >> large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the >> hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not >> meant to be "fully self-contained". >> > >> >I think that Bill's answer[1]: >> > >> >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without >> respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without >> such server infrastructure providing interactivity." >> > >> >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >> >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >> >point either:-( >> > >> >Thanks >> > >> >Ivan >> > >> >[1] >> >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >> >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence >> > >> > >> >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks >> for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >> >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content >> that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties >> of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that >> other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and >> present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging >> the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same >> content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >> >>> >> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am >> going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully >> self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, >> feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire >> by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly >> key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF >> subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF >> use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for >> example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional >> workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a >> portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for >> external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the >> past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the >> same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. >> Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM >> publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS >> library used by the publication. >> >> >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a >> requirement in a POW? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Leonard >> >> >> > >> > >> >---- >> >Ivan Herman, W3C >> >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >> >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> >mobile: +31-641044153 >> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >
Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)??
Leonard Rosenthol   Thu, 13 Aug 2015 22:39:55 +0000

public-digipub-ig > August 2015 > 0000.html

Received on Thursday, 13 August 2015 22:40:59 UTC

Show in list: by dateby threadby subjectby author

Link to this message in this page.

Sent to: bmccoy@idpf.org
Copied to: whmccoy@gmail.com, tsiegman@wiley.com, bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com, ivan@w3.org, public-digipub-ig@w3.org.

You and I do agree that portability is a spectrum, but not sure if all others do. I wanted to put forth some examples along that spectrum. And I agree that for an EPUB, requiring embedded fonts is reasonable – but not so for arbitrary OWP content. And it adds to the problems that are going to arise in trying to use EPUB for both use cases – and still be able to have either existing or future UA/RS handle both (assuming that such is even a goal) On the other hand, we do quite disagree on the scripting and referenced data example. I would consider a document that could fetch “changing values” as portable – provided that the URI from which the data is fetched is declared inside the package (and therefore unchanged). And to me, this is where caching comes in – to be able to store the last used value so that something is always displayed to the user. I also see this as a place where service/web workers could come into play… Now the above said – I would not expect to see such a thing in a “document” but I would expect to have it in “packaged OWP”…. And thus another split between the goals of EPUB?!?! Leonard From: Bill McCoy Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 6:25 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol Cc: Bill McCoy, "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken", Bill Kasdorf, Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing IG Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? Leonard, I thought you and I agreed that "portability" was a spectrum not black-and-white. On that spectrum, missing fonts to me obviously decreases the portability of content, to a degree that is dependent on the nature of the content and font, and how uniquely specified the required font is (if a URI/URL to find it then that is not "missing" so much as "unpackaged"). This is critical because a missing Amharic font or even more so a missing Japanese font containing user gaiji, is highly likely to render a document unreadable by most people on most systems, so could be considered a significant "ding" on portability. This is one way in which today's EPUB differs from arbitrary OWP content, in that we have conformance requirements that limit define "Publication Resources" to include all resources (including fonts) where "In the absence of this resource, the EPUB Publication might not render as intended by the Author", and require that "All Publication Resources must be listed in the Package Document (as defined in manifest), adhere to the constraints for Core Media Types and Fallback and be located as per Publication Resource Locations." So to me your font example supports my proposed definition of "portable" even though I agree with you that a missing font is not always a fatal blow to portability. As far as scripting, maybe I wasn't communicating clearly as I'm not sure we disagree. I think it's consistent with the abstract definition of portability to have an external reference to a script or data in a portable publication, so long as there's a strong "promise" in some manner that that result of an HTTP request to the resource (referenced by URI/URL) will always return the same representation. If OTOH the external reference is to a Perl program on a server that returns different data/script content depending on say the phase of the moon, then such an external reference is not portable. It is this fundamental attribute of the REST architecture of the Web (the distinction between resource and the infinity of different representations that a request to that resource might possibly return) that makes it possible for the online Web change so quickly, but that same attribute is antithetical to portability. My mentioning of browser cache was just a side note, just to indicate my concern that the kind of "promise" I refer to above can't be considered to be reliably made via HTTP cache-control headers. BTW I believe here in W3C ;-) the right term to use is "User Agent" not "Reading System" and there is also an argument to be made that EPUB should adjust its current terminology as it evolves towards closer alignment with the overall OWP (unless W3C prefers that different instantiations of Web Technologies should stick with distinct terms, for example "User Agent" for browser instantiations, "Reading System" for standalone publication instantiations, and "Application" for installed applications based on Web technologies)... but maybe it could be better to have "User Agent" mean any instantiation of OWP, and pick a more descriptive term for the browser-specific instantiation). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: Sorry but I have to disagree with these definitions, based on actual user requirements (at least users we’ve talked to). Portable means that all resources are defined. That I don’t need anything else to understand the structure of the content. However it does not mean that these resources are all available (or up to date) at any given time. Let me use a common PDF case – fonts. In PDF, all fonts must be declared BUT the actual font data need not be embedded into the document and instead is provided by the “RS” at runtime. While we might prefer a document that has all fonts embedded, even w/o them the document is portable. Programmatic elements are a completely different ballgame, IMO, and have no bearing on the definition of portability. To me it doesn’t matter if a script (that itself is embedded in the package) refers to embedded information or external information AS LONG AS the referencing of that information is via a pre-declared reference. Leonard From: Bill McCoy Date: Thursday, August 13, 2015 at 3:24 PM To: "Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken" Cc: Bill Kasdorf, Leonard Rosenthol, Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing IG, Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? proposed concrete definition: portable (in Web context) means: does not require active server infrastructure. or to state it another way, portable means that all programmatic elements are part of and execute in the context of the content ("code-on-demand" in Roy Fielding terms). --Bill On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:16 PM, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken <tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com>> wrote: As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" +100 Tzviya Siegman Digital Book Standards & Capabilities Lead Wiley 201-748-6884<tel:201-748-6884> tsiegman@wiley.com<mailto:tsiegman@wiley.com> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Kasdorf [mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:00 PM To: Leonard Rosenthol; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: RE: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? The example of the embedded quiz was not what I was considering "dynamic," in the sense of something that is potentially different every time it's accessed (and perhaps whose whole point is that _only_ the current-when-accessed version is what is intended). For the example of the quiz, I would argue that the _quiz itself_ doesn't change, but the answers provided by the student obviously do (ditto any grading provided by a widget). So I would consider the quiz, in that case, legitimately part of the publication, but the answers not to be. Nevertheless, you have a good point, the portable publication may in fact go "fetch" the quiz, or something even simpler like a streaming video. So in those cases I would agree that the quiz or the video, though external resources, _should_ be considered part of the publication, and the publication not to be "complete" without it. I deliberately use quote marks because that appears to me to be the true edge case. If the portable version of the publication contains the widget that provides the quiz, or if the video is embedded, then there isn't really a question. What this is leading me to question is whether a publication needs to be "complete" in order to meet the EPUB+WEB vision in the sense of "identical in all three states (online, cached, portable)." This discussion is leading me to lean toward entertaining the notion that it's perfectly reasonable for "a publication" not to lose its identity just because some resources might need to be retrieved from the network. I realize that may strike folks as a major concession to the vision of EPUB+WEB, but I would point out that the alternative seems to make less intuitive sense. Particularly in education, there will be LOTS of cases where rich functionality is fetched from the network. (Ditto for magazines and news.) It does not seem reasonable to me not to still consider the portable version the same publication, as long as it has the appropriate links and fallbacks. And I guess that gets me at least most of the way back to where I started, which would be to consider the publication complete as long as it contains the links to external resources. But there is definitely a gray area, which then comes down to when the resources are intrinsic to the publication and when they are not. It's going to be hard to draw a line here. . . . This is potentially one of those issues where we can get wrapped around the axle on the semantics without contributing anything very useful to the solution. I would not want to draw such a strict line on "completeness" that it would undermine the concept of a publication existing in online/cached/portable states, or that it would leave out huge classes of publications like rich textbooks, magazines, etc. As for the semantics, we should probably focus on what we mean by "portable," and not get quite so hung up on what we mean by "complete." That is verging very close to the argument about what "is" is. ;-) --Bill K -----Original Message----- From: Leonard Rosenthol [mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>] Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 2:30 PM To: Bill Kasdorf; Ivan Herman Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? I think the second case - dynamic content - is not as clear cut as you make it out to be, Bill. It is very dependent on how that information is presented - or how much of the publication’s “content” is actually derived from that data. Sure, if we are only talking about a single value on a page (such as a stock price or the current weather), not having it probably wouldn’t impact the understanding of the material or the consumption experience of the publication. BUT consider something such as an embedded quiz in a textbook, where the questions themselves are coming in live…if they aren’t available (either live or cached) then the student can’t continue. Leonard On 8/13/15, 11:38 AM, "Bill Kasdorf" <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com<mailto:bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>> wrote: >Just a quick observation wrt Ivan's example of citations to external publications (my deliberate wording). The papers cited in a journal article (often scores and sometimes hundreds of them) are NOT part of "the publication," they are referenced by the publication. The citations are part of the publication; the cited resources are not. > >We need to be careful, in considering the concept of completeness, to distinguish between whether we are talking about "the publication itself" vs. "the publication and everything else it references." > >This also applies to dynamic content, e.g., a link that fetches up-to-date information (a stock price, the weather in Sydney, comments from other students in my class on what we're studying, etc.). > >In both of those cases, imo, it is reasonable to consider the >publication complete (and, put the other way around, inappropriate to >consider it incomplete) if those links/citations are present, even if >they are not actionable at a given time (e.g., when the portable >version of the publication is consumed offline), and whether or not the >external content has been cached. This is _very_ important for >publications like magazines and news publications. (Be careful to avoid >reflexively thinking "books.") > >--Bill K > >-----Original Message----- >From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org<mailto:ivan@w3.org>] >Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 12:55 AM >To: Leonard Rosenthol >Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG; Bill McCoy >Subject: Re: "Completeness" as a feature of a POW (aka EPUB+Web)?? > >Leonard, > >good catch, the formulation is indeed not clear. Obviously, there is a need for external link to various things; to take the area of academic publication as an example, such a publication may include references to other papers, it may include references to research data (that may be too large to be included in the document), etc, and it is essential to keep the hyperlink nature of those references. In this sense, "completeness" is not meant to be "fully self-contained". > >I think that Bill's answer[1]: > >"portable documents "promise" a reliable consumption experience without respect of any particular server infrastructure and, especially, without such server infrastructure providing interactivity." > >what I believe we all mean. I am not sure "idempotence"[2], proposed by >Bill, is really the right term, but I do not have a better one at this >point either:-( > >Thanks > >Ivan > >[1] >https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Aug/0056.htm >l [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idempotence > > >> On 13 Aug 2015, at 02:31 , Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com<mailto:lrosenth@adobe.com>> wrote: >> >> In rewriting the document about Portable Documents for the web (thanks for the suggestion & link, Tzviya), I can across the following paragraph: >> >>> EPUB can be viewed as simply defining a specialization of Web content that assures that a collection of content items has the needed properties of completeness and logical structure, and does so in a standard way that other processing tools and services can reliably create, manipulate, and present such collections. This completeness constraint is key for bridging the current gap between an online and offline/portable view of the same content (see <a href="#whynow">section on usage patterns</a> below). >>> >> While not spelled out here or in the “section on usage patterns”, I am going to take the terminology of “completeness” to mean “fully self-contained” (aka no external references). If it means something else, feel free to ignore what follows (but only after you correct me :). >> >> In the current use cases for EPUB (books, magazines, etc.), the desire by the publisher to have everything contained inside the package is clearly key – just as that same property has been a tenant of the various PDF subset standards (PDF/A, PDF/X, etc.) However, there also exists for PDF use cases where external references are a key aspect to the workflow – for example, external content or color profiles in a variable or transactional workflow (eg. PDF/VT). As such, I would like to suggest that as a portable document for OWP, that there also needs to be a provision for external references in this POW (Portable Open Web) format. >> >> I know that there have been discussions about this around EPUB in the past for large assets (eg. Video and audio), but I would put forth that the same principles could also be applied for other types of content as well. Be it advertisements in a publication, current data sets in a STEM publication or even just a reference to the latest version of a common JS library used by the publication. >> >> What do others think about this? Is completeness/self-contained a requirement in a POW? >> >> Thanks, >> Leonard >> > > >---- >Ivan Herman, W3C >Digital Publishing Activity Lead >Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >mobile: +31-641044153<tel:%2B31-641044153> >ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 > > > >