15:42:16 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwg
15:42:16 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/06/11-pwg-irc
15:42:17 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
15:42:17 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Working Group Telco
15:42:17 <ivan> Chair: Tzviya
15:42:17 <ivan> Date: 2018-06-11
15:42:17 <ivan> Regrets+ Avneesh, George, romain, marisa, rdeltour, awsisco, benwaltersms, jmulliken, nickruffilo, bigbluehat
15:42:17 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2018Jun/0029.html
15:42:18 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2018-06-11: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2018Jun/0029.html
15:50:09 <ivan> regrets+ vlad
15:58:04 <Jun_Gamo> Jun_Gamo has joined #pwg
15:58:09 <tzviya> present+
15:58:14 <ivan> ivan+
15:58:15 <laudrain> laudrain has joined #pwg
15:58:17 <zheng_xu> zheng_xu has joined #pwg
15:58:24 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pwg
15:58:32 <Hadrien> present+
15:58:38 <Jun_Gamo> present+
15:58:46 <laudrain> present+
15:58:57 <dkaplan3> present+
15:58:58 <zheng_xu> present+
15:59:44 <caitlin_gebhard> caitlin_gebhard has joined #pwg
15:59:46 <Rachel> present+
15:59:49 <wolfgang> present+ wolfgang
15:59:55 <caitlin_gebhard> present+
16:00:21 <franco> franco has joined #pwg
16:00:21 <laurentlemeur> laurentlemeur has joined #pwg
16:00:26 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pwg
16:00:40 <laurentlemeur> present+ laurent
16:00:46 <dauwhe> present+ dauwhe
16:00:50 <derekjackson> derekjackson has joined #pwg
16:01:46 <Rachel> Zakim, pick a victim
16:01:46 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose dkaplan
16:01:49 <josh> josh has joined #pwg
16:02:02 <dkaplan3> zakim, you mean well, but you are mistaken as to my abilities
16:02:02 <Zakim> I don't understand you, dkaplan3
16:02:13 <josh> present+
16:02:14 <Rachel> Zakim, pick a victim
16:02:14 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose josh
16:02:42 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pwg
16:02:43 <ivan> scribenick: josh
16:03:09 <josh> tzviya: Minutes from the F2F. Comments?
16:03:26 <josh> topic: Minutes from previous meetings
16:03:33 <tzviya> present+
16:04:03 <jbuehler> jbuehler has joined #PWG
16:04:13 <josh> Topic: Minutes from previous meetings
16:04:19 <tzviya_> tzviya_ has joined #pwg
16:04:39 <tzviya_> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-05-31-pwg.html
16:04:52 <tzviya_> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2018/2018-06-04-pwg.html
16:05:00 <ivan> resolved: Minutes of F2F approved
16:05:03 <josh> tzviya: Minutes from F2F Day 1 approved.
16:05:04 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
16:05:10 <ivan> resolved: Minutes of last week meeting approved
16:05:17 <josh> ... Minutes from F2F Day 2 approved.
16:05:22 <gpellegrino> present+
16:05:34 <josh> ... Minutes from last week approved.
16:05:49 <josh> topic: Covers
16:06:20 <tzviya_> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/210
16:07:27 <ivan> q+
16:07:37 <josh> ... DAISY team in not here (in another meeting). Should cover be part of the infoset or stand-alone?
16:07:39 <tzviya_> ack ivan
16:08:16 <laudrain> q+
16:08:22 <dkaplan3> q+
16:08:24 <tzviya_> ack laudrain
16:08:25 <Rachel> q+
16:08:26 <BenSchroeter> BenSchroeter has joined #pwg
16:08:27 <garth> garth has joined #pwg
16:08:37 <garth> present+ Garth
16:08:44 <garth> q?
16:08:47 <BenSchroeter> present+
16:09:02 <ivan> q+
16:09:18 <josh> laudrain: The cover was identified as something generally useful for book shelf support. It could be a thumbnail, but any image (icon) could be useful.
16:09:44 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pwg
16:09:45 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:09:50 <josh> ... We had a discussion about where (within schema.org) a cover could be described.
16:09:53 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
16:10:30 <timCole> timCole has joined #pwg
16:10:35 <josh> dkaplan3: We need to be able to associate alt-text with a cover. If images are part of structural properties then they must be described like other content.
16:11:05 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pwg
16:11:19 <tzviya> q?
16:11:22 <tzviya> ack Rachel
16:11:22 <garth> q?
16:11:26 <josh> ... Creators need just one place to put the cover, describe the cover, etc...
16:11:51 <josh> Rachel: If the cover is included in the infoset, do the reading systems have a way to access that?
16:11:58 <rkwright> present+
16:12:06 <dauwhe> q+
16:12:13 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:13:53 <tzviya> q?
16:14:12 <dauwhe> http://schema.org/ImageObject
16:14:48 <garth> q?
16:15:02 <Hadrien> q+
16:15:02 <josh> ivan: I am worried about the question. My recollection is that using any schema.org properties for a cover is a problem because all they do is assign a URL to an image. You could add metadata to the object which refers to the image. The cover is a resource (like any other) in HTML5 and can therefore use any of the a11y features of HTML5.
16:15:03 <garth> q+
16:15:06 <dkaplan3> q+
16:15:18 <tzviya> ack dauwhe
16:16:53 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:16:57 <josh> dauwhe: I think I disagree with dkaplan3. I see the utility in a cover independent of what content authors would be doing for the reader. As an author I want to determine how to display a cover (via HTML etc).
16:17:42 <Jean_K> Jean_K has joined #pwg
16:18:11 <garth> q?
16:18:13 <josh> Hadrien: I have provided two ways to do this in the example. Perhaps we should consider using rel values. This issue is related to TOC and Privacy Policies as well as covers.
16:18:51 <tzviya> ack garth
16:20:04 <josh> garth: I agree with dauwhe and Hadrien. In EPUB land there was confusion and reader could display two covers... I don't think we want to force reading systems to hunt through the content to find the cover.
16:20:08 <tzviya> ack dkaplan
16:21:16 <garth> q?
16:21:20 <garth> q+
16:21:48 <tzviya> ack garth
16:22:00 <garth> q+
16:22:44 <josh> dkaplan3: We need to have (what we don't have in EPUB) clear, consistent instructions on what to do with a cover that covers the vast majority of use cases. Image content (that is important, like a cover is) must have metadata that describes it.
16:23:01 <ivan> q+
16:23:20 <tzviya> ack garth
16:23:30 <josh> ... it is not okay to have a place for an image without defined procedures for defining the image as a requirement.
16:23:41 <Bill_Kasdorf> q+
16:23:41 <dauwhe> +(a)1(1y)
16:23:56 <josh> garth: I agree with dkaplan3.
16:23:58 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:24:15 <ivan> http://schema.org/StructuredValue
16:25:38 <dkaplan3> +1 Ivan
16:26:09 <josh> ivan: When we refer to external resources, we should use http://schema.org/StructuredValue. There is a description. There is a URL. So we are half way there. What is missing is a "rel" equivalent. I am not yet sure how we would do that.
16:26:10 <garth> q?
16:26:17 <david_stroup> david_stroup has joined #pwg
16:26:30 <tzviya_> tzviya_ has joined #pwg
16:26:35 <josh> Bill_Kasdorf: Is the cover actually important content?
16:26:50 <garth> q?
16:26:55 <garth> ack Bill_Kasdorf
16:27:03 <josh> dkaplan3: Decorative images do require blank alt text.
16:27:32 <josh> Bill_Kasdorf: So we do still a way to indicate blank alt text.
16:27:36 <ivan> q?
16:27:38 <josh> dkaplan3: Indeed.
16:27:54 <garth> q?
16:28:00 <ivan> q+
16:28:07 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:28:39 <timCole> q+
16:28:39 <Hadrien> q+ to answer to ivan
16:28:43 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:28:43 <Zakim> Hadrien, you wanted to answer to ivan
16:28:51 <tzviya> ack timCole
16:28:51 <josh> ivan: No one has answered this question: If I have a resource that I want to indicate as a cover. I am not sure how to do that.
16:29:08 <tzviya> q+ Hadrien
16:29:32 <josh> timCole: Covers are artwork that may have an image.
16:29:51 <josh> ivan: Are we sure that a cover will always have an image?
16:29:56 <laudrain> q+
16:30:06 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:30:14 <josh> timCole: Covers are creative content. An image is not required.
16:30:57 <josh> Hadrien: I don't everything listed will be structured data.
16:31:03 <tzviya> ack laudrain
16:31:34 <josh> laudrain: during the F2F we suggested using ARIA roles.
16:31:45 <josh> ivan: ARIA roles are not in JSON-LD.
16:32:40 <tzviya> "@type": "http://bib.schema.org/CoverArt"
16:32:47 <josh> tzviya: Can we resolve the cover image issue without addressing related items?
16:33:06 <josh> q+
16:33:17 <tzviya> ack josh
16:33:30 <garth> q+
16:33:51 <tzviya> ack garth
16:34:10 <ivan> q+
16:34:10 <dkaplan3> q+
16:34:16 <dkaplan3> q-
16:34:28 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:34:39 <josh> garth: Cover needs to be optional. If present it should be an image.
16:34:48 <laurentlemeur> def of CoverArt: The artwork on the outer surface of a CreativeWork.
16:35:31 <josh> ivan: I have a slightly radical proposal. Schema.org came up as a convenience. We should realize that we are talking about values assigned to terms which are not in schema.org.
16:35:41 <timCole> q+
16:36:15 <Hadrien> q+
16:36:20 <josh> ... I think we are hitting the limits of schema.org. We could define our own type. Hadrien did this for Readium.
16:36:35 <tzviya> ack timCole
16:36:45 <timCole> http://bib.schema.org/additionalType
16:37:25 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:37:27 <josh> timCole: We can define a type in our own vocabulary. Google will ignore the additional type but works for systems that care about it.
16:38:51 <josh> Hadrien: It is possible to have our own structure since we have a context. We can have something like "spine" etc that map back to schema.org. I tried the Google tester and it seemed to understand. We need our own context for other reasons.
16:39:01 <ivan> q+
16:39:07 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:39:13 <josh> ivan: One of us should propose a specific type that we will use.
16:39:42 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/212
16:39:44 <josh> topic: Proposed Context
16:40:20 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/215
16:40:31 <ivan> q+
16:40:35 <josh> tzviya: Question about this?
16:41:21 <josh> Hadrien: We have an initial structure to start from. We can map those without difficulty.
16:41:27 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:41:42 <garth> q?
16:42:35 <josh> ivan: There is a JSON-LD context for various reasons in the repository. We should review it.
16:43:01 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/blob/master/common/context.jsonld
16:43:27 <josh> ... I put in a pull request to map above to schema.org adding some more entries.
16:43:44 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/pull/221
16:43:47 <josh> ... PR 221.
16:44:11 <wolfgang> q+
16:44:31 <tzviya> ack wolfgang
16:45:01 <josh> wolfgang: Is the reading order an ordered list while other is unordered?
16:45:02 <garth> q?
16:45:08 <Hadrien> q+
16:45:08 <josh> Hadrien: Yes.
16:45:37 <josh> Topic: Audio Books
16:46:14 <tzviya> ack Hadrien
16:46:15 <josh> tzviya: wendyreid will be inviting members to join an Audio Books Task Force. Thanks to wendyreid for heading this TF.
16:47:14 <josh> ... please reach out if you are unfamiliar with any of this.
16:47:31 <dauwhe> q+
16:47:37 <josh> Topic: Bike-shedding on Names
16:47:45 <garth> ack dauwhe
16:48:30 <garth> q?
16:48:33 <ivan> q+
16:48:42 <garth> ack ivan
16:48:45 <josh> dauwhe: Spine is a problematic term with a lot of history. I worry about non-English speakers. Is "spine" meaningful around the world?
16:48:59 <dkaplan3> !i paisley suit
16:49:39 <dkaplan3> s/!i paisley suit//
16:49:44 <josh> ivan: "Spine" in EPUB was initially confusing to me. I did not know that. I agree with dauwhe
16:49:46 <Bill_Kasdorf> so what's wrong with reading order?
16:50:16 <garth> q?
16:50:27 <dauwhe> q+
16:50:31 <laurentlemeur> agree with Ivan
16:50:31 <ivan> q+
16:50:31 <tzviya> ack dauwhe
16:50:32 <garth> ack dauwhe
16:50:34 <josh> garth: What other terms are acceptable?
16:50:51 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:50:59 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to readingOrder
16:51:25 <josh> dauwhe: Something like reading order. Descriptive terms out-weigh the cost of a longer name.
16:52:14 <david_stroup> sequence or readingOrder
16:52:18 <josh> ivan: schema.org has plenty of long terms. readingOrder seems perfectly fine to me.
16:52:26 <ivan> +1
16:52:26 <tzviya> +1
16:52:27 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
16:52:28 <laudrain> +1
16:52:29 <wolfgang> +1
16:52:29 <Rachel> +1
16:52:30 <laurentlemeur> +1
16:52:30 <caitlin_gebhard> +1
16:52:30 <zheng_xu> +1
16:52:31 <franco> +1
16:52:31 <derekjackson> +1
16:52:32 <jbuehler> +1 reading order
16:52:35 <BenSchroeter> 0
16:52:35 <timCole> +1
16:52:35 <dauwhe> +1
16:52:35 <Hadrien> +1
16:52:35 <garth> +0.5
16:52:35 <wendyreid> +!
16:52:38 <dkaplan3> +1
16:52:43 <Jean_K> +1
16:52:48 <david_stroup> +1
16:52:49 <josh> tzviya: Vote on readingOrder.
16:52:57 <Jean_K> NOT MY DOG!!!
16:53:01 <ivan> present+ Jean_K
16:53:17 <timCole> present+ Tim_Cole
16:53:19 <josh> +1
16:53:27 <garth> q?
16:53:33 <ivan> resolved: readingOrder it is!
16:53:41 <franco> present+
16:53:48 <garth> q?
16:53:50 <ivan> q+
16:53:54 <tzviya> ack ivan
16:54:04 <josh> tzviya: Resources?
16:54:06 <Bill_Kasdorf> addlResources?
16:54:27 <Jean_K> extra!!!
16:54:38 <josh> ivan: I would be more careful and suggest "extraResources".
16:54:44 <Jean_K> Think of the non-native English people in the world. :)
16:54:57 <laurentlemeur> +1 for extraResources
16:55:02 <Jean_K> SPEAKING
16:55:27 <wolfgang> q+
16:55:52 <tzviya> ack wolfgang
16:55:53 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1 to extraResources
16:56:18 <laudrain> Why extra ?
16:56:42 <laudrain> +1 to « resources »
16:56:43 <josh> wolfgang: We need to consider external resources which may or may not be included. The line is blurred between "within" and "without" our publication. Ancillary is more clear.
16:56:53 <laudrain> q+
16:56:54 <Jean_K> Non-native English-Speaking people are less likely to know "ancillary" or that "addl" is an abbreviation of "additional"
16:57:06 <laurentlemeur> q+
16:57:08 <Jean_K> q+
16:57:10 <tzviya> ack laurentlemeur
16:57:18 <tzviya> q+ laurentlemeur
16:57:19 <laurentlemeur> q-
16:57:23 <tzviya> ack laudrain
16:57:31 <josh> laurentlemeur: I agree with Hadrien. Why not just "resources"?
16:57:55 <Bill_Kasdorf> do we need to distinguish ancillaryResources and externalResources?
16:58:01 <tzviya> s/laurentlemeur/laudrain
16:58:04 <BenSchroeter> etCetera
16:58:17 <josh> laurentlemeur: Ancillary does not work well for French speakers.
16:58:26 <tzviya> ack Jean_K
16:58:30 <zheng_xu> +1 to "resources"
16:58:58 <Bill_Kasdorf> otherStuff
16:58:58 <josh> Jean_K: "extra" is probably as good as we'll get.
16:59:18 <laudrain> +1
16:59:19 <dauwhe> +1
16:59:20 <Hadrien> +1
16:59:20 <Jean_K> +1
16:59:21 <ivan> +0.8
16:59:21 <garth> +1
16:59:21 <wolfgang> +1
16:59:21 <josh> Vote on "resources"
16:59:22 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
16:59:23 <zheng_xu> +1
16:59:24 <timCole> 0
16:59:26 <david_stroup> +1
16:59:27 <tzviya> 0
16:59:28 <wendyreid> +1
16:59:29 <josh> 0
16:59:30 <franco> 0
16:59:37 <derekjackson> 0
16:59:39 <laurentlemeur> +1; same with extraResources
16:59:44 <BenSchroeter> 0
16:59:52 <jbuehler> 0
16:59:54 <caitlin_gebhard> 0
17:00:05 <josh> Vote on "extraResources"
17:00:08 <ivan> +1
17:00:08 <tzviya> +1
17:00:09 <Jean_K> +1
17:00:10 <franco> +1
17:00:11 <Bill_Kasdorf> +1
17:00:12 <wolfgang> -1
17:00:13 <laurentlemeur> +1
17:00:13 <josh> +1
17:00:13 <garth> +0.8
17:00:15 <Hadrien> 0
17:00:16 <timCole> 0
17:00:17 <jbuehler> 0
17:00:18 <BenSchroeter> +1
17:00:18 <laudrain> -0.99
17:00:19 <zheng_xu> -1
17:00:24 <dauwhe> 0
17:00:24 <wendyreid> -1
17:00:32 <ivan> resolved: resources it is!
17:00:41 <josh> tzviya: "resources" won.
17:01:01 <ivan> q+
17:01:16 <josh> ... there are many action items to be delivered this week. Please check GitHub with affordances label.
17:01:16 <tzviya> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/labels/topic%3Aaffordances
17:01:19 <tzviya> ack ivan
17:01:24 <david_stroup> can we add properties to 'resources' to make the necessary distinctions folks want to make?
17:01:57 <josh> ivan: There were some questions that folks should review an act on.
17:02:48 <josh> ivan: I would prefer folks edit and make pull requests.
17:02:58 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has left #pwg
17:03:04 <josh> Meeting adjourned.
17:03:16 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:03:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/06/11-pwg-minutes.html ivan