14:41:59 RRSAgent has joined #dpub 14:41:59 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/08-dpub-irc 14:42:01 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:42:01 Zakim has joined #dpub 14:42:03 Zakim, this will be dpub 14:42:03 ok, trackbot 14:42:04 Meeting: Digital Publishing Interest Group Teleconference 14:42:04 Date: 08 August 2016 14:42:30 Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/17135e3f4d8045edb576940cd292a84f@AUS-WNMBP-005-n.wiley.com 14:42:34 Chair: Tzviya 14:42:43 ivan has changed the topic to: Aug 8th agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/17135e3f4d8045edb576940cd292a84f@AUS-WNMBP-005-n.wiley.com 14:42:57 Regrets: NickR, Heather 14:54:56 Avneesh has joined #dpub 14:56:01 pkra has joined #dpub 14:58:26 present+ Avneesh 14:58:39 present+ 14:59:03 garth has joined #dpub 14:59:19 present+ Karen 14:59:59 Present+ Ivan 15:00:04 Present+ George 15:00:12 brady_duga has joined #dpub 15:00:24 present+ duga 15:00:31 rdeltour has joined #dpub 15:00:48 present+ astearns 15:00:49 lrosenth has joined #dpub 15:01:01 present+ Leonard 15:01:04 present+ ShaneM 15:01:10 scribenick: karen 15:02:30 present+ Romain 15:02:37 bjdmeest has joined #dpub 15:02:43 present+ Liam 15:02:51 Tzviya: Let's get started 15:02:56 Present+ Ben_De_Meester 15:02:56 https://www.w3.org/2016/08/01-dpub-minutes.html 15:02:57 …first item is approving the minutes from last week 15:03:04 present+ garth 15:03:12 …please take a look to see if I gave you an assignment if you were not here last week 15:03:31 …you may inadvertently accepted writing for a use case document 15:03:33 ...Comments? 15:03:36 …Minutes approved 15:03:40 …Before next item on the agenda 15:03:45 …I forwarded an email from the ARIA WG 15:03:56 …requesting assistance working on the ARIA practices guidelines 15:03:57 Vlad has joined #dpub 15:04:04 present+ 15:04:09 …writing ARIA and HTML details for semantically rich text 15:04:14 …any volunteers from that? 15:04:23 @: Is that on our call this Wednesday? 15:04:29 Tzviya: Let me look 15:04:35 s/@/George/ 15:04:37 present+ Benjamin_Young 15:04:55 …That was talking about the toggling aspect. The actual writing examples does not touch on toggling but the writing examples of textual descriptions 15:05:01 boris_anthony has joined #dpub 15:05:02 …That group meets Mondays I think 15:05:10 …you may not need to join; meet offline 15:05:20 present+ Chris_Maden 15:05:27 George: There are lots of examples, details format as opposed to teaching people how to write 15:05:28 present+ Peter Krautzberger 15:05:31 …use what exists already 15:05:36 …instead of re-inventing the wheel 15:05:54 …There are funded projects by WGBH, Benetec; have all worked on these 15:06:06 …getting them into the architecture is good, but not reinventing the wheel 15:06:13 Tzviya: May I put Matt in touch with you? 15:06:15 George: Sure 15:06:26 Tzviya: He may want one phone call, but assume we can all swing thtat 15:06:29 ...Excellent 15:06:33 Bert has joined #dpub 15:06:37 …Next item on agenda is an update on the Web Annotations WG 15:06:41 present+ 15:06:48 …Benjamin is one of the editors; please take it away 15:07:06 Ben: Web Annotation WG was born out of DigPub IG use cases on Annotations 15:07:16 …and we completed work of Annotations CG that existed two years prior to that 15:07:27 …We have published CRs…both undergoing testing 15:07:29 (and vocbulary) 15:07:36 …that traffic in the data model 15:07:39 s/vocbulary/vocabulary/ 15:07:44 …to handle both the data model and the protocola 15:07:54 …hope to have that complete before TPAC 15:07:54 q? 15:08:01 …happy to give more of an overview 15:08:04 clapierre has joined #DPUB 15:08:09 George: Do you have an accessibility testing component? 15:08:16 q+ to talk to A11Y testing 15:08:20 q+ 15:08:33 Ben: We have been in touch with them…to see if we have made statements about it; have JSON model; undergone i18n review 15:08:39 ack Sh 15:08:39 ShaneM, you wanted to talk to A11Y testing 15:08:40 …I can check status of the Accessibility features also 15:08:42 ack ShaneM 15:08:48 ack iv 15:08:51 ShaneM: Ivan, if you want to speak... 15:08:56 Ivan: Not just on the testing side 15:09:05 present+ Charles_LaPierre 15:09:08 …for those of you in EPUB work, an earlier version of the model was adopted in EPUB 15:09:17 …one of the differences between the previous CG model 15:09:22 …and the one which was written into EPUB 15:09:31 …was that some accessibility features were added to the EPUB version 15:09:44 …to get around those features; were retrofitted into version now in W3C 15:09:57 …In some sense, we took over what EPUB did in the original model in this respect 15:10:02 George: When it was HTML instead of JSON 15:10:14 …we were pretty confident in the Accessibility because of HTML 15:10:24 Ivan: As I said, we pretty much took over what you guys did 15:10:35 Tzviya: I'm pretty sure I saw that there were no Accessibility concerns 15:10:52 Ivan: The fact of bringing over the Accessibility part of the EPUB model…was done independently of W3C 15:10:56 q+ to say more about a11y 15:11:02 ack sh 15:11:02 ShaneM, you wanted to say more about a11y 15:11:02 Tzviya: Any other questions? 15:11:12 ShaneM: I did the APA review for Accessibility 15:11:22 …the questionnaire asked a specific question about Accessibility testing 15:11:31 …we are doing no Accessibility testing of the data model 15:11:36 …there is no there there 15:11:49 …nothing to exercise; hope that answers your question, even if you don't like it 15:11:59 George: The implementations of the UI will need to be tested 15:12:25 ShaneM: presumably yes; but no testing requirements, cannot do formal testing as part of CR anyway 15:12:30 Ivan: You don't sounds very happy 15:12:46 q+ 15:12:47 George: My concern is that the data would be moving over and then be converted to an image which would lock out accessibility 15:12:51 …I have seen that happen before 15:12:54 Ivan: I understand that 15:12:56 q+ 15:13:08 …What W3C standardized at this point is exclusively the datamodel 15:13:16 q- 15:13:17 ack lr 15:13:17 …what user client does, we don't have control over that 15:13:20 ack Leonard 15:13:28 LR: I was going to say exactly what Ivan did 15:13:34 ack big 15:13:34 Tzviya: Benjamin 15:13:51 BIG: There is possible opportunity for future specification work 15:13:55 chaals has joined #dpub 15:13:58 …one screen shot…lower case 15:14:14 …annotations…MS does what you say; two screen shots; one of web page and one of highlights 15:14:25 q+ 15:14:31 …one of my personal hopes is that it paves a better path; a data rich format in which you can do accessible highlights 15:14:39 …We have done some engagement with them [MS] but a bit late 15:14:51 …by its nature the Web Annotation does provide more flexibility 15:15:01 George: If the W3C requires two implementations to go to Rec 15:15:15 George++ 15:15:22 …I would argue that an implementation that does it through screen shots and is not accessible, that does not meet criteria for a valid implementation 15:15:38 Benjamin: What we test is just a datamodel; the JSON LD and what they make out of it is out of scope 15:15:43 q+ 15:15:52 ack iv 15:15:52 …of what is written currently is a vocabulary and a data model 15:15:54 ack Ivan 15:16:10 Ivan: To be very clear, the way the above mentioned MS implementation works 15:16:19 …it would not and could not use the model we are designing 15:16:24 …So the issue does not arise 15:16:31 …They call themselves annotations but do not rise to this 15:16:42 …The implementations we are in contact with now are doing things much closer to what we have 15:16:51 …Hypothes.is and an Italian company 15:17:06 …they create an exchange, JSON structure…web pages or other things they annotate 15:17:11 ack av 15:17:13 …the problems you are referring to do not arise 15:17:15 ack AV 15:17:34 AV: not specifically regarding Access testing but maybe evaluating its usability for external descriptions? 15:17:40 George: That was one of the use cases all along 15:17:48 …to add descriptions to existing content for accessibility 15:17:55 Ivan: That kind of use case if perfectly covered by the model 15:18:08 …provided we have an implementation on top of the model 15:18:12 q? 15:18:14 AV: ok 15:18:21 Tzviya: Any other comments? 15:18:28 …let's go to our favorite topic; always use cases 15:18:41 …Last week we assigned segments of the use case document to teams of people 15:18:54 …please share your updates by email so we can discuss in the weekly meetings 15:19:06 …We gave people two weeks; does anyone have updates to share? 15:19:09 Shane is waiting to coordinate with Heather - she is back today / tomorrow. 15:19:13 Ivan: I do and am looking for URL 15:19:33 q+ to ask about an issue 15:19:36 https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/manifest-package-update/index.html#there-should-be-a-possibility-to-combine-manifests-from-several-origins 15:19:43 ack da 15:19:43 dauwhe, you wanted to ask about an issue 15:19:47 ack da 15:19:51 https://github.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/issues/34 15:19:58 Da: I filed an issue on the use cases 15:20:04 …right now there is a CSS requirement section 15:20:07 q+ update on UC updates 15:20:15 oops 15:20:16 q+ 15:20:17 …It feels odd that is addressed at a specific technology 15:20:31 …given things in this section which relate to personalization or some of the fundamental properties 15:20:32 q- update 15:20:37 q+ 15:20:52 …wonder if we should kill off this section and move to more appropriate sections 15:21:06 Tzviya: Once you see emails, you'll see Brady Duga picked this up 15:21:23 Brady: yes, I sent an email on use cases; I go on vacation next so you can pick it back up 15:21:28 …how do you style a single document 15:21:42 …seem valid; they could be moved around; but seem like real use cases not covered by CSS 15:21:43 ack iv 15:21:51 Tzviya; nobody is married to sections as they are 15:22:01 s/single document/not a single document/ 15:22:03 Ivan: +1 to what was just said about moving around to make more logical 15:22:11 …what I did was to review 15:22:17 …the section on manifests 15:22:30 Tzviya: Boris, did you want to address something that Dave said? 15:22:39 Boris: no, just to give my update 15:22:59 Ivan: I looked at the section in the core document is manifest and core packaging is tied together. So first thing I did was to separate the two 15:23:01 https://cdn.rawgit.com/w3c/dpub-pwp-ucr/manifest-package-update/index.html#manifests-should-include-the-basic-characteristics-of-the-constituent-resources 15:23:03 …looking at URL 15:23:11 …I kept it in a separate branch of the repo for now 15:23:21 …I even gave a small intro on what we mean by manifest in this area 15:23:26 …and I try to keep on a high level 15:23:44 …typically…for proper rendering; separate from content data 15:23:58 …therefore packaging, what it looks like, use cases, looks like a different area 15:24:06 …so I separated into a separate section 15:24:15 …I cleaned up use cases and added some meat to the examples 15:24:20 …Won't go into details here 15:24:26 …Only thing that's important that was missing 15:24:29 …is two things 15:24:36 …Both things came up during discussion on the locators 15:24:47 …one is that there should be flexible ways to get hold of the manifest for the publication 15:25:02 …in some cases the manifest may be part of the package; in other cases we may find through the link header 15:25:02 q? 15:25:10 …this is in line with how the web manifest doc is done 15:25:15 …Made that very explicit 15:25:18 …Other thing is less obvious 15:25:23 …not sure what to do about it 15:25:39 …the locator discussion led to a structure whereby the final manifest for PWP may come from many sources 15:25:51 …algorithm on how various bits and pieces are to be combined 15:26:05 …there is a use case; we also had discussion with DFF group of EPUB 15:26:14 …simpler than defining combinations 15:26:20 …So I added an additional note into the document 15:26:33 …we may have to drop the requirement if not valid 15:26:36 …so that was there 15:26:41 …The rest of the work I did was cleaning up 15:27:00 …trying to bind, link to some of features listed in the fundamental features section of PWP due to this relationship with manifest 15:27:04 …that section is more of less ok 15:27:11 Tzviya: Any comments? 15:27:29 Tzviya: I think I need to re-read it before I comment 15:27:44 …One of things Ivan did was separate the manifest from packaging; as TBD; that is part I need to do 15:27:59 q+ 15:28:00 Brady: Could you do a paragraph on the manifest living in separate pieces 15:28:08 Ivan: I have it in the document 15:28:12 Brady: Just reading that now 15:28:15 is a usage ecample the same as a use case? or as a scenario? 15:28:20 Tzviya: We came up with this as a group months ago 15:28:27 Brady: Seems like a complicating approach 15:28:32 Ivan: yes, it's a valid use case 15:28:38 …but it may be just too much; may need to drop 15:28:42 Brady: I don't see the note 15:28:55 Tzviya: We may decide this is more complicated than necessary 15:28:57 s/brady/Garth 15:29:02 ack lr 15:29:04 Garth: I now see the note 15:29:09 Leonard: I have not seen Ivan's note 15:29:30 …One of the main reasons why we have the multiple cases was to address the issue of content that is locked down and cannot be modified 15:29:38 …whether DRM or @ cannot be modified 15:29:41 …cannot do something with it 15:29:56 …so we needed a mechanism that would allow us to replace parts of the manifest without modifying the manifest 15:30:05 …so we needed a model to merge multiple components 15:30:14 Ivan: I described part of use case as separate 15:30:34 …what you described can be done by duplicating the manifest; it is doable but error prone 15:30:41 …Look at 5.7 and 5.8 this is how I did it 15:30:53 …comments on the wording; that was in the back of my mind as well 15:31:11 ack bo 15:31:11 Tzviya: Any questions on the manifest section; since we have not all digested it, please take put comments on the list 15:31:21 …Boris, you have an update 15:31:41 Boris: The intro that was requested from Hugh McGuire is passing back and forth so should be available in the next few days 15:31:51 …you assigned me private libraries or private collections 15:32:05 …I would like to get feedback before I commit; or do I commit and then get slaughtered? 15:32:07 q+ 15:32:11 Tzviya: We are gentle; don't be shy 15:32:16 …we'll give you our feeback 15:32:41 Boris: not just the process, but not entirely clear to me if private collections are germane to the document itself 15:32:55 Tzviya: you can send privately to a few folks, but we prefer list 15:32:57 ack iv 15:33:02 Boris: ok, I will do on list first round 15:33:21 Ivan: what I did, Boris, was to make my changes on a separate branch rather than the pull request 15:33:31 …then will get it into the final doc 15:33:44 …I should have sent an email about the separate branch 15:33:51 Boris: I need to get more familiar with GitHub 15:34:22 Ivan: that's like climbing the Himelayas 15:34:36 Tzivya: unless other updates from anybody else…let's talk about TPAC 15:34:44 https://www.w3.org/dpub/IG/wiki/Sep_2016_F2F_Logistics_and_Details#Schedule 15:34:46 …Last week we discussed what other groups we want to meet with 15:34:52 …and now we need to talk about what we want to discuss 15:34:55 …here is list of groups 15:35:05 …we have not started reaching out because we don't know what it is we will talk about 15:35:14 …So now is the opportunity to give us some discussion points 15:35:19 q+ 15:35:19 …Don't all talk at once! 15:35:23 ack ShaneM 15:35:35 George: Discussion points for the two days 15:35:49 …you mentioned meeting with WCAG; was there something specific to talk about? 15:35:58 George: The work that we do I would think would align with WCAG 15:36:06 …and their plans to move forward with that 15:36:15 …I would not think it's an extension, but integrated into WCAG 15:36:30 …how can we ensure that what we develop conforms to WCAG guidlines 15:36:40 Tzviya: You mean the EPUB Accessibility work? 15:36:48 q+ 15:36:58 George: And moving forward with Accessibility in PWP; we need tight alignment there 15:37:09 …and talk about EPUB3.1 and the Acess spec and how that integrates with W3C 15:37:22 Tzviya: I would think anything we do with PWP would be in alignment with WCAG 15:37:29 q+ to ask about Annotation + PWP needs 15:37:30 …we presented our concerns about WCAG does not cover 15:37:37 …would it be about extending to concept of a package 15:37:40 q+ 15:37:51 ack sh 15:37:57 George: I think items we have outlined that they take note and needs to be integrated moving forward 15:38:08 ShaneM: I know we talk about Access; APA group meets on M/T 15:38:16 …do some coordination with them; some extensibility talks 15:38:29 …don't know if we need to schedule time, but ask that APA staff our meeting when we talk about it 15:38:39 Tzviya: I have spoken with Rich and Janina 15:38:53 …I believe that will happen on Monday; topic of extensibility and ARIA is already on the table 15:39:11 …We need to get all of our Accessibility topics lined up to figure out what we need to talk about and who needs to be there 15:39:16 ShaneM: We have talked a few times 15:39:31 …about HTML extension on Note/NoteRefs and if that is something we want to pursue 15:39:43 …not sure if we do real work at TPAC or coorination work 15:39:50 q? 15:39:53 ack lr 15:39:54 Tzviya: I"ll be at APA meeting this week if you can bring up again 15:39:58 Leonard: I will echo 15:40:11 …it would be great to get the specific list of topics nailed down around Accessibility 15:40:28 …and just to make sure that our discussions are really in general about publications on the web and not focus on existing solutions 15:40:39 …look forward to new things; like NoteRef 15:40:48 ack big 15:40:48 bigbluehat, you wanted to ask about Annotation + PWP needs 15:40:49 Tzviya: We have a long list of meetings 15:41:08 Benjamin: I wanted to as emissary from Annotation WG, that at TPAC or before, we are in good stead 15:41:20 …to PWP and how much else is needed going forward, but I am happy to help work on it 15:41:30 Tzviya: Ivan or Shane do you want to comment on that at all? 15:41:30 q? 15:41:42 Ivan: to be clear, the Annotation group does not meet at TPAC 15:41:53 …more an internal schedule when we can meet among ourselves 15:42:05 …how Annotation works with PWP would be a separate discussion interesting to have 15:42:13 …no synchronization scheduled yet 15:42:23 Benjamin: more of a topic to ask if we should discuss it 15:42:27 ack iv 15:42:27 ack Ivan 15:42:35 Ivan: to go back to accessibility story 15:42:43 …maybe one thing worth discussing 15:42:53 [notes from the sidelines, if you want to talk to Web Platform about packaging, friday would be the day to request an agendum: https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/blob/gh-pages/meetings/16-09-23TPAC-4.md ] 15:42:54 …Deborah and Charles published the Accessibility Note a few weeks ago now 15:43:00 …with some references to what we miss in WCAG 15:43:20 …question is whether it's worth having a discussion with WCAG about if there is a next step; what happened there 15:43:33 …Charles likely knows more, but I have not seen any public feedback on that note 15:43:41 Charles: no one has reached out to us to move that forward 15:43:57 …i look at specific issues we raised and see if it makes sense to coordinate on that 15:44:06 Ivan: I think a discussion on that should happen 15:44:20 …Moving to another area, i18n, I see my name; we should check with Richard Ishida 15:44:32 …to see if other local language groups are working on use cases on rendering 15:44:48 …other groups are making similar documents like we have for the Japanese 15:45:00 …I would like to get some information on what is happening there; what are the main points 15:45:11 Tzviya: Dave I know that you are just back from vacation 15:45:23 …before you went away, Richard opened a few issues on LatinRec 15:45:29 …don't remember what the issues were 15:45:56 …Are these things you see us working on in the next few weeks, or would they fall into the implementation examples that they [CSS WG] had requested from you 15:46:16 Dave: not significant changes; I made a bunch to the document and we can always republish as needed 15:46:30 …As for future of the document, I'm not prepared to talk about it at this moment 15:46:42 Tzviya: Are you prepared to talk about CSS issues you want to talk about? 15:46:51 …Aside from the fact that we love CSS 15:46:58 @: generated text 15:47:10 Tzviya: CSS and APA are forming the CSS API mappings 15:47:28 …that might be something that DPUB wants to get involved with, but not likely the bulk of our conversation 15:47:35 s/@/George 15:47:38 George: If we say it's important, hopefully that will be enough 15:47:49 Dave: we published @ spec for first time in 13 years 15:47:52 I'll make sure generated text is in the accessibility mappings discussion 15:48:04 …Alt Text; we have added ability to provide an accessible description of that content 15:48:14 s/@/Generate Content 15:48:19 …we don't have implementations yet, but that idea was supported by CSS WG 15:48:35 Tzviya: So we should identify what we want to discuss 15:48:43 …not just come up with what we want, but come up with examples 15:48:58 …We have a number of new members that joined; suspect that these folks can help us to generate those polyfils 15:49:05 …and people having side conversations who may be able to help 15:49:15 Dave: we discussed stuff around Note and NoteRef 15:49:35 q+ to talk about display of note 15:49:42 ack sh 15:49:42 ShaneM, you wanted to talk about display of note 15:49:43 …to go forward, we need to think about the markup and how you want these things to be displayed; what would be the default rendering in various environments 15:49:54 ShaneM: I was not sure who was speaking... 15:50:07 Tzviya: It was Dave [Cramer] 15:50:09 “these are the Dave’s I know I know”… 15:50:14 ShaneM: we have done things about rendering 15:50:23 …not saying much about rendering in the default case 15:50:40 …have some stuff to tie into CSS support for magical numbered lists, which is progressing in its own spec 15:50:48 …we should do more thinking about it 15:50:55 Tzviya: And let's introduce the two of you at TPAC 15:51:05 …Some of the other groups we talked about meeting with at TPAC 15:51:07 …SVG 15:51:17 Ivan: I was the one putting that in 15:51:22 …I don't remember why 15:51:33 Tzviya: POE, Permissions and Obligations Expression 15:51:44 Ivan: on that side it should be more like them informing us if they are ready 15:51:44 q+ 15:51:52 I'm quite interested in continuing the 'customization of reader experience' topic in CSS, but I'm not sure that's ready for TPAC discussion 15:51:56 …POE group published a use case document while I was on vacation 15:52:09 …Group is busy finalizing the use cases and hope by TPAC the use case document is final 15:52:36 …I know there is work going on at BISG to get some publishing related use cases into the doc; don't know where that stands now 15:52:48 …Important that the use cases reflect what the community has 15:53:03 …main line of use cases of what POE works on; and get general idea 15:53:13 …if there are any glaring holes that are not addressed; that would be useful 15:53:15 ack lr 15:53:27 Leonard: I agree with what Ivan said that they should fill us in 15:53:39 …but we have a whole bunch of use cases that fall into the POE camp 15:53:48 …and we should also educate them about our use cases and our needs 15:54:03 …if there is an opportunity for more of us to sit around the table, let us drive home our needs 15:54:09 Ivan: one does not drive the other 15:54:18 Leonard: I thought we should be stronger about it 15:54:29