12:43:01 RRSAgent has joined #pwg 12:43:01 logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc 12:43:07 present+ 12:43:11 present+ 12:44:12 rrsagent, make logs public 12:44:15 Meeting: Publishing Working Group F2F Day 1 12:44:47 Chair: Garth 12:45:04 Date: 2019-05-06 12:47:01 present+ 12:47:06 ivan has joined #pwg 12:47:26 rrsagent, set log public 12:47:26 Meeting: Publishing Working Group F2F Meeting—Day 1 12:47:26 Chair+ garth, tzviya, wendy 12:47:26 Date: 2019-05-06 12:47:26 Agenda: https://tinyurl.com/y5j4c95r 12:47:26 ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2019-05-06: https://tinyurl.com/y5j4c95r 12:51:34 romain has joined #pwg 12:53:54 present+ 12:54:00 present+ 12:54:18 scribe+ romain 12:54:19 scribenick: romain 12:54:38 ❤️ romain 12:54:59 garth has joined #pwg 12:55:07 present+ Garth 12:55:38 present+ 12:55:42 marisa has joined #pwg 12:55:51 Rachel has joined #pwg 12:55:55 laudrain has joined #pwg 12:55:59 present+ 12:56:01 present+ 12:56:02 present+ 12:56:04 david_stroup has joined #pwg 12:56:09 Ralph has joined #pwg 12:56:19 present+ Ralph_Swick 12:56:35 Andrea has joined #pwg 12:56:57 franco has joined #pwg 12:57:06 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-TB-_KCg97smmjcsbIVpi728qduOwESr3Og91-2Gtd4/edit?usp=sharing 12:57:19 https://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html#addressing to talk to the irc bot 12:57:28 present+ CharlesL 12:57:37 present+ avneesh, george 12:57:49 present+ tcole 12:58:05 guest+ Leslie_Hulse 12:58:15 Nellie has joined #pwg 12:58:20 mattg has joined #pwg 12:58:29 present+ 12:59:08 present+ 12:59:29 present+ karen, david_stroup , bigbluehat, duga 12:59:49 present+ george, avneesh, franco 13:00:14 present+ neelie 13:00:33 present+ tzviya, wendyreid 13:00:37 George has joined #pwg 13:00:41 zakim, who is here? 13:00:41 Present: tzviya, dkaplan, wendyreid, CharlesL, ivan, romain, Garth, dauwhe, Rachel, laudrain, marisa, Ralph_Swick, avneesh, george, tcole, mattg, franco, karen, david_stroup, 13:00:45 ... bigbluehat, duga, neelie 13:00:45 On IRC I see George, mattg, Nellie, franco, Andrea, Ralph, david_stroup, laudrain, Rachel, marisa, garth, romain, ivan, RRSAgent, Zakim, wendyreid, dkaplan3, CharlesL, dauwhe, 13:00:45 ... toshiakikoike, tzviya, plinss_, bigbluehat, astearns, dmitry, florian[m], Travis, jyasskin 13:00:51 present+ toshiakikoike 13:00:56 present+ George 13:01:19 present+ 13:01:30 guest+ Jeremy_Morse 13:02:06 scribenick: wendyreid 13:02:56 tzviya: Introducing the schedule for today. We are going to cover getting WP to CR, audiobooks to FPWD, and some ideas for future things. 13:03:20 duga has joined #pwg 13:03:20 scribenick: Rachel 13:03:29 guest+ Andrea_Martucci, Geeth_(Sangeetha)_Sivaramakrishnan 13:03:50 present+ 13:04:08 Geeth has joined #pwg 13:04:33 Topic: horizontal reviews 13:04:37 garth: we've taken the draft to the TAG for review 13:04:40 Subtopic: TAG review 13:04:46 q? 13:04:55 ... tzviya and dave are set up to lead us in this session 13:05:13 romain_ has joined #pwg 13:05:13 -> https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/417 WPub #417 Audiobooks 13:05:18 tzviya: we opened two issues- audiobooks and webpub 13:05:26 Karen has joined #pwg 13:05:27 ... let's start with webpub 13:05:42 q? 13:05:48 ...we haven't received much formal feedback on webpub 13:05:54 Avneesh has joined #pwg 13:06:03 -> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/344 TAG #344 Web Publiations 13:06:09 -> TAG on manifests https://github.com/w3ctag/design-principles/issues/95 13:06:15 present+ 13:06:18 https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/344 13:06:26 ...we're not going to come up with meaningful answers this morning but it's worth reviewing these questions this morning so we can keep them in the back of our mind as we go through the rest of these sessions 13:06:31 JeremyMorse has joined #pwg 13:06:35 ... let's go through the highlights 13:06:50 ...the biggest question is the relationship to manifest and what a manifest is 13:06:52 q+ 13:07:00 q? 13:07:06 ...what is it that we are trying to accomplish with a manifest 13:07:13 ...what is a package and why do we need it 13:07:26 present+ 13:07:27 ...what is is we're trying to accomplish with jsonld 13:07:46 ... the question of protection in the use case document 13:07:52 More detailed (and final?) comments: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/344#issuecomment-485034489 13:08:07 q+ 13:08:09 q? 13:08:13 present+ Karen 13:08:14 ...see the document for the rest 13:08:22 timCole has joined #pwg 13:08:26 dauwhe: some of this feedback starts around the manifest 13:08:52 ...TAG has a design principle around not recreating the web application manifest 13:08:52 q? 13:08:54 ack dauwhe 13:08:56 ack dauwhe 13:08:56 ack dauwhe 13:09:17 ...I think that's a key issue in getting buy in from the tag and the browser vendors 13:09:30 geoffjukes has joined #pwg 13:09:43 present+ 13:09:47 ... I think the arguments we've heard that the extension model does make people happy 13:09:51 ack ivan 13:10:07 ivan: I put in IRC a reference to more detailed comments 13:11:03 q+ 13:11:12 ...if we look at dbaron's comments from a couple of weeks ago they are much more specific 13:11:37 ...they will allow us to avoid these philosophical discussions 13:11:56 q+ 13:11:57 ...they look at why webidl is right to use, etc 13:12:01 q+ 13:12:16 q+ 13:12:20 ...unless/until tag says we must use web app manifest, I think we just move on 13:12:25 ...and not use it 13:12:28 q? 13:12:30 ack dauwhe 13:12:32 ack dauwhe 13:13:05 dauwhe: I wouldn't characterize it that way, I think they gave us a bunch of feedback about the manifest that we described 13:13:15 ivan: if I look at the comments in 344 13:13:30 q? 13:13:43 ack mattg 13:13:44 ...I don't see anywhere that this general principle is something that they came back to us with 13:13:53 ...this manifest conversation is an endless loop 13:14:03 +1 to Ivan 13:14:22 q? 13:14:29 ack tzviya 13:14:36 mattg: from his comments I think he is saying that the expectations from our manifest description are not clear 13:14:57 tzviya: I think it's important that we not try to solve this in this session 13:14:59 q- 13:15:10 ...what's important is this was less than clear 13:15:14 q? 13:15:21 ...and we consider this in refinements 13:15:30 q+ 13:15:44 q+ 13:16:03 q+ 13:16:23 ...I think we need to go back to dbaron and consider what it is clarify - webidl (why), bounds (urls), obtaining a manifest 13:16:26 q? 13:17:01 mattg: they would like to see more of what a user agent would do with this manifest 13:17:20 ack ivan 13:17:28 ivan: there are some very specific issues 13:17:58 ... we can carve it up into specific assignments to tackle here or later with dbaron 13:18:08 mgarrish has joined #pwg 13:18:19 q? 13:19:14 ack bigbluehat 13:19:23 ... he has created an issue with a bunch of subissues and we have to divide and conquer 13:19:43 bigbluehat: we need to be more explicit in our use of this thing 13:20:12 q? 13:20:16 q+ 13:20:57 User2 has joined #pwg 13:21:39 ack george 13:22:22 George: it sounds as though naming may be part of our issue with the manifest 13:22:36 ivan: how about waybill? 13:23:06 q? 13:23:45 q+ 13:24:11 ack Rachel 13:24:33 Rachel: I want to go back to a point of Ivan's that there's some action items to follow up on, instead of circling back on the WAM discussion 13:24:36 ack tzviya 13:24:37 ...we may want to point to the new version and ask dbaron 13:26:19 q? 13:26:22 action: ivan to talk to david about WebIDL 13:26:41 action: ivan to talk to david about Localizable strings 13:27:07 #geeth 13:27:09 action: tzviya to edit explainer about WAM 13:27:57 q? 13:28:46 action: mattg report back to dbaron that link rel value issue is resolved 13:29:19 q? 13:29:53 action: dauwhe obtaining manifest integrating with CORS explanation (?) - there is an open issue for resolution as well 13:29:57 q? 13:30:03 leslie has joined #pwg 13:30:22 s/obtaining/to obtain/ 13:30:28 subtopic: TAG feedback on audiobooks https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/417 13:30:43 s/mattg report/mattg to report/ 13:30:53 dauwhe: there are quite a few comments - a basic one is why are zipping things that are already compressed 13:31:07 ... we could use bundled http exchanges or tar 13:31:22 ...we were asked to go into why things were rejected 13:31:38 ...the do not reinvent the wheel 13:31:55 q+ 13:31:58 ... ie the atom file 13:32:37 ...I think the fundamental thing they want to see if why we're not using more of what's out there - is an audiobook closer to a webpub or a podcast and why? 13:32:44 q? 13:32:49 ack wendyreid 13:33:04 wendyreid: we can make some action items out of this 13:33:18 ... we need to better explain the discuss on the packaging items 13:33:35 action: wendyreid better explain the packaging options we rejected and why 13:33:44 q+ 13:34:07 ...we need more feedback from podcasters 13:34:14 q? 13:34:16 q+ 13:34:22 q+ 13:34:36 q+ 13:34:50 ack mattg 13:34:53 ... we might be trying to solve a problem for the podcast industry that they just don't have 13:35:54 ack dauwhe 13:36:03 mattg: when this is open and unpackaged, is this a web publication? We don't want to proliferate formats. That's part of the reason we are looking at these formats 13:36:20 q? 13:36:30 dauwhe: being the audience to a podcast makes you a valuable participant 13:37:08 q+ 13:37:20 ack ivan 13:37:27 ...I think we should detail why we are looking into this 13:37:54 ack dkaplan3 13:38:02 ack dkaplan3 13:38:02 ivan: avneesh asked about accessibility and the alternate format issue is one we have to continue to consider 13:38:05 ack dkaplan 13:38:29 dkaplan3: don't judge what a podcast can do based on what they do now 13:39:22 q? 13:39:26 q- 13:40:00 q+ 13:40:24 ack bigbluehat 13:40:37 User2 has joined #pwg 13:41:25 1. Podcasts can do structure 13:41:50 q+ 13:42:01 2. TAG is keeping us honest; "publishers know how to do zip" is a good feature in zip's favor, but it is not the last word 13:42:16 when we write a spec we get to recommend a new technology. 13:42:58 3. We have a great document of our needs and requirements, so we can compare that to existing techs, eg. podcasts. 13:44:03 q? 13:44:10 q+ 13:44:13 ack george 13:44:40 q+ 13:44:40 George: I'm a little annoyed by the lack of structure in the audio spec 13:45:27 ... why aren't we defining the webpub TOC 13:45:42 We need to determine if we're targeting a package-based distribution model (ala EPUB) or a Webby "constructed" model of distribution (ala Web Apps) or both. 13:45:47 ack leslie 13:45:55 ... it's the collection that's the most important the navigation through the collection 13:46:07 Determining that will clarify our description format (manifest), our package (or lack of packing) choice, and how we expect these to be created and deployed 13:46:20 q? 13:46:29 leslie: I think it's important when you're talking through the delivery format that it's zipped up and clean when you're talking to a publisher 13:46:41 wendyreid: Action items!!! 13:46:44 scribejs, set leslie Leslie Hulse 13:47:30 podcasts can have structure, but implementation is non standard https://podnews.net/article/chapter-points-a-waste-of-time 13:47:32 action: wendyreid to talk to Tess on the audio explainer issues 13:48:10 q+ to ask about general rules for profiling/extending WPUB 13:48:15 ack wendyreid 13:48:34 ack bigbluehat 13:48:34 bigbluehat, you wanted to ask about general rules for profiling/extending WPUB 13:49:05 bigbluehat: in thinking about the audiobook - our processing model is a little fluid 13:49:24 q? 13:49:46 ...this is our first attempt at a profile - I wonder if there are upstream rules we need to set for future profiles of wpub 13:49:54 ...like, you need a TOC 13:50:03 q? 13:50:14 mattg: I fully agree with that 13:50:19 q+ 13:50:51 ack laudrain 13:51:27 laudrain: I think we should bring back the question of "for who is this spec written" 13:52:40 q+ 13:53:06 ...we should be thinking about these specific needs that we have as we consider moving forward 13:53:10 ack leslie 13:54:20 +1 Leslie 13:54:24 q? 13:54:28 leslie: we need to think about efficiency and consistency as an element of this as we did in the development of epub 13:54:36 q+ 13:55:27 ack garth 13:55:44 q? 13:55:54 Subtopic: A11y review 13:56:30 ivan: The only major I18n issue is the base direction of text 13:56:44 ...which we are not in the position to properly solve 13:57:09 ...we are dependent on jsonld - and we also know it is not up to the jsonld working group to solve 13:57:27 ...I have spoken to the i18n group extensively about this 13:57:54 ...the most recent comments are that what we have now is okay as is 13:58:30 ...dbaron also said that this paragraph needs improvement 13:58:35 s/A11y review/Horizontal Review 13:58:53 ...its not a proper/final solution 14:00:41 ...there is one more issue that was not raised which was to use language maps in the manifest 14:00:50 ...I wouldn't discuss that in the face to face 14:01:11 ...apart from that i18n seems complete 14:01:29 tzviya: we're in pretty good shape with a11y 14:01:30 subtopic: accessibility 14:01:50 ...Avneesh has been working for a formal a11y review 14:01:56 Avneesh: when should it start? 14:01:59 tzviya: now 14:02:29 Avneesh: we had a discussion about the fast chek list - it's not complete 14:03:07 subtopic: security/privacy 14:03:10 q? 14:03:13 https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/ 14:03:24 ...after we take care of that we can start the formal review 14:03:49 tzviya: we have no volunteers for working in security/privacy 14:04:26 ...we really need to get through this questionairre 14:04:44 ...ping is the Privacy Interest Group 14:04:55 q? 14:05:01 ...bigbluehat and dkaplan3 can help a little 14:06:29 q+ 14:06:36 action: Ralph to ask PInG if someone can walk us through the questionnaire because we are without an expert 14:07:17 tzviya: Brady? Can you help? 14:07:30 duga: I guess because you're making me? 14:07:57 q? 14:07:57 Task Force: bigbluehat, dkaplan3, duga 14:07:57 ack bigbluehat 14:07:58 ack bigbluehat 14:08:11 q? 14:08:12 bigbluehat: it's not as scary as it seems 14:08:41 q+ 14:09:22 q? 14:09:32 ack dkaplan 14:09:41 ...(gives inspirational speech) 14:10:25 q? 14:10:37 dkaplan3: if you care about business impact - this is a good place for you to participate 14:10:45 duga: who's in charge 14:10:59 tzviya: I can help coordinate to start 14:14:16 I am leaving here today. I will join again tomorrow. 14:38:32 romain has joined #pwg 14:43:05 romain_ has joined #pwg 14:43:31 marisa has joined #pwg 14:43:34 Avneesh has joined #pwg 14:47:55 duga has joined #pwg 14:53:50 q? 14:54:04 laudrain has joined #pwg 14:54:36 ivan has joined #pwg 14:54:37 scribe: romain 14:54:41 scribenick: romain 14:54:43 mattg has joined #pwg 14:55:21 geoffjukes has joined #pwg 14:55:21 Topic: Syncrhonized media 14:55:39 Karen has joined #pwg 14:55:57 marisa: I work for DAISY and what we've done for 20+ years is provide standards and support for synchronized audio books, for people with print disabilitites 14:56:06 … there are various flavours of audio books 14:56:19 danielweck has joined #pwg 14:56:20 … sync clips of audio and HTML text, sync audio with no text, etc 14:56:26 present+ 14:56:27 … we looked at how to do this for Web Pub 14:56:42 … the precendent is DAISY tech, and after that EPUB Merdia Overlays (MO) 14:56:55 … we looked at a lot of different technology 14:57:10 s/precendent/precedent 14:57:12 https://w3c.github.io/sync-media-pub/ 14:57:36 franco has joined #pwg 14:57:55 … the documents I linked to are the first draft of an overview, explainer, use cases, and specs 14:58:19 … the CG is called "Synchronized Media" which could cover a lot of things (captions, audio, etc) 14:58:36 … after looking at our UC, we decided to focus on synchronized audio narration 14:58:56 … so right now we call the spec "Synchronized Narration" (sync audio with HTML text) 14:59:18 … we have an explainer that goes over why we didn't pick other technologies (we talked about that in the previous f2f) 14:59:52 … we decided to go for a custom solution 15:00:24 … Synchronized Narration isn't necessarily tied to Web Publications, you could use it for standalone HTML 15:00:38 … it's a simple and starightforward JSON structure 15:00:54 … essentially a sequence of clips (text/audio pairs) 15:01:22 s/ clips (text/audio pairs)/ audio clips and text pairs/ 15:01:39 … the advantages of keeping it very simple is that it's easy to implement 15:01:59 … (an experimental implementation is almost ready) 15:02:38 … what we need to do still is flesh out the spec and the explainer, and look at how to include it in Web Pub 15:03:12 … we looked at how to apply this narration structure to an audio book or a textual Web Pub 15:03:30 q? 15:03:32 … and decided it makes more sense to add that as a property to the Web Pub, rather than making it a Web Pub profile 15:03:35 q? 15:03:36 q+ 15:03:45 ack Ralph 15:03:50 q+ 15:03:56 Ralph: I'm curious about the potential other publishers 15:04:13 … I wonder if you got feedback from other groups like SMIL, TTML, etc 15:04:41 marisa: we used to be in the SMIL WG when it existed 15:04:54 smil :( 15:04:57 (pun intended) 15:05:01 … SMIL was isn't really implemented outside of EPUB 3 15:05:49 … our usage of SMIL in EPUB 3 always was a bit different compared to how it was used in other places 15:06:22 … for TTML, the text lives in the same file as the timing information 15:06:47 q? 15:06:55 … for WebVTT, there was no easy way to put text references other than using metadata 15:07:16 q+ 15:07:17 Ralph: what I was wondering if e.g. the WebVTT group agreed with this analysis 15:07:33 … and record these conversations 15:08:13 marisa: we discussed with them at TPAC 15:08:21 +q 15:08:35 Ralph: you can record that you had these discussions, the next step is to file an issue on their tracker 15:08:41 ack garth 15:09:06 q- later 15:09:12 garth: this looks like how we used SMIL in EPUB, which is to my view a feature 15:09:52 … maybe you can walk us through the spec, e.g. what is role? do you need to add IDs to the HTML? etc 15:10:06 q+ 15:10:12 marisa: the examples are based on HTML having the IDs 15:10:27 … we thought about using CFI, but I'm reluctant to make this complex 15:10:53 … the dream is to have a non-destructive way to add narration to an HTML 15:11:04 … if there is a way to do that in Web Pub, we'll be the first to use it 15:11:27 … another problem we had in MO was that you had to structure your document in the way the HTML was structured 15:11:37 q? 15:11:51 … I don't think anybody ever did this except for skippability/escapability 15:12:15 … (see https://w3c.github.io/sync-media-pub/narration.html#syncnarrpub-terminology for definiitions of "skip" and "escape") 15:13:13 … so in order to have meaningful skipping and escaping you need to have a "role" on the narration object 15:13:48 [marisa describes the structure of Sync Narration, based on the example in the spec draft] 15:14:33 mgarrish has joined #pwg 15:14:36 marisa: linking the synchronized narration can be done with the HTML link element 15:14:58 … one sync narration corresponds to exactly one HTML doc (which is a useful simplification from MO) 15:15:02 ack George 15:15:08 q+ 15:15:31 George: in the last f2f we went to the APA meeting and they asked the same questions about why we were doing something different 15:15:45 … we explained to them and they gave their blessing, WebVTT people were in the room 15:16:08 … another point: to have the synchronized narration file, do you have to touch/edit the HTML file? 15:16:28 marisa: if the elements already have IDs, you don't have to do anything else, if they don't have IDs you need to add them 15:17:00 George: pretending you have an independent publicaiton that's text, another one that's audio, can you add that in between to synchonized both? 15:17:10 ack leslie 15:17:15 marisa: that's the dream, but we're not there yet 15:17:30 leslie: ??? 15:17:58 s/???/will current adopters of media overlays be orphaned by this proposed spec? 15:18:02 s/???/I'm working with a vendor that is doing media overlay on epub - will that map? 15:18:09 marisa: I think it's reasonably straightforward, you can reasonably go from MO to sync narration, and the other way around too 15:18:09 ack ivan 15:18:24 q? 15:18:38 ivan: on the issue of the text reference, there are 2 things that are worth referring to 15:18:48 q+ 15:18:54 … if you say this is a URL and not an ID, it leaves the door open 15:19:20 marisa has joined #pwg 15:19:41 … there is a spec out there that the Web Annotation group has developped, on how you can express references in JSON 15:19:54 … this use case is very close to what is done in Web Annotation 15:20:22 … the problem we had was that if you want to use a URL it becomes controversial, but we don't have this constraint 15:20:52 … so we could say either you have a URL, or an object which structure is defined in the Web Annotation spec 15:21:50 another thing that may be a problem is if this file (sync narration) is referred to from a manifest as a separate file, and all the discussion abou the origin and absolute URLs apply 15:22:29 … the 3d question I had was administrative: are we confidentn enough to say that this would be a Rec from this WG (currently it's a CG report) 15:22:36 q+ to ask whether the sync media work should be produced by PWG or another WG? 15:22:55 s/from this WG/from ths WG?/ 15:23:15 ack timCole 15:24:06 timCole: in addition to the technical note, we talked about CFI in Web Anno and one feedback was: are we making enough use of CSS Selectors Level 3? 15:24:21 … they go well beyond IDs and allow you to refer to some text without IDs 15:24:37 … another thing that came out was shadow dom 15:25:13 … sometimes content can come from JS, as shadow DOM, there is an API to point to that 15:25:34 … we want to make sure we look at all those issues and possibilities 15:25:34 -> Selectors 3 https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-3/ and selectors 4 https://drafts.csswg.org/selectors-4/ 15:25:44 ack laudrain 15:26:04 q? 15:26:16 laudrain: the explainer says that Web Annotations are not implemented in browsers, but if we're doing something new it won't be implemented either 15:26:22 q- 15:26:41 … I'm a bit sad that Web Annotations cannot be used here, is there a possibility that they could still be used? 15:27:02 marisa: I'm open to revisiting that, what we found is that there was not an associated processing model for playback 15:27:18 … it also didn't feel like a good fit for nesting 15:27:48 … there are possibly some customization you can do in Web Annotation, if you know more or have example please share 15:28:28 laudrain: Web Annotations is used for a11y, for instace for dyslexic students to colorize syllabus, this is close to what synchronized audio could do 15:29:06 i|ack laudrain|-> http://www.idpf.org/epub/linking/cfi/epub-cfi.html EPUB CFI 1.1 (Canonical Fragment Identifiers) 15:29:26 marisa: it's all worth exploring, but I'm always hesitant about standardizing something that we don't have people representing here 15:29:53 q+https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#selectors 15:29:59 +1 to building on a shared foundation--i.e. the selection/targeting/pointing-at model from Web Annotation 15:30:06 ivan: we can use the selection model from Web Annotation without using the full Web Annotation 15:30:11 (bug) 15:30:21 q+ danielweck 15:30:21 q? 15:30:30 q- https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#selectors 15:30:36 q+ 15:30:54 … it can be used without referring to the processing model 15:31:07 marisa: how is the implementation support on Web Annotation selectors? 15:31:24 bigbluehat: in what language and what platform? 15:31:34 … there are a lot of JS libraries 15:31:53 … audio and video-focused libraries predate the Web Annotation spec 15:32:11 … the textual selectors have a lot of support in JS libraries in the browser 15:32:31 … chromium developes work on a simplififed version, possibly done in an extensible way 15:32:55 s/developes/developers/ 15:33:24 … Apache Annotator is the one that has the most advanced text selectors implementation 15:33:30 https://annotator.apache.org/ 15:33:39 marisa: I don't worry so much about the audio 15:33:46 … the text is the trickier case 15:34:12 … when I looked at the Annotation selectors model, there was so many ways to do it that I was afraid of confusing people 15:35:03 bigbluehat: in your document, you almost have a Web annotation selector (given properties renaming), it's the same model 15:35:24 ivan: I wouldn't be shocked if we limit the option of selectors for this use case 15:35:46 … there is already a mechanism that can be used to refer to portion of the text without having to modify the text 15:36:03 q? 15:36:05 ack tzviya 15:36:05 tzviya, you wanted to ask whether the sync media work should be produced by PWG or another WG? 15:36:07 ack tzviya 15:36:32 tzviya: we should think about this needs to be kept in the Pub WG or could even be moved to another WG 15:36:36 ack danielweck 15:37:00 https://www.w3.org/TR/selectors-4/#the-current-pseudo 15:37:46 danielweck: I have a concern with our current proposal in that it uses the same "hack" we used in MO that allows content creators to define the style of the currently active narrated text 15:38:03 present+ danielweck 15:38:03 … for that they define the CSS class that is used to style these elements 15:38:53 … I feel that this is a hack and we can do better, like reusing a pseudo CSS selector (:current, :past, :future) which looks great on paper 15:39:23 … we need to figure this out with the CSS WG 15:39:26 +1 15:39:44 ack garth 15:39:44 marisa: yes, totally agree with you, we added a note about that in the draft 15:40:17 garth: I think this draft is amazingly cool, also that it can be converted to EPUB MO 15:40:31 q? 15:40:31 … we don't have to tell people to stop doing MO if they can easily migrate 15:40:33 q? 15:40:34 q+ 15:40:54 q? 15:40:57 dauwhe: I haven't looked up the draft, but if you need me to bring things to CSS I'm happy to do it! 15:40:57 ack George 15:41:45 George: regarding the groups, several people can work together: Pub WG, EPUB WG, etc 15:41:46 guest+ hadrien 15:42:04 q? 15:42:13 … I just see those two groups need to work together to "birth this child" 15:42:21 wendyreid: Action items!! 15:43:14 … this spec is very important to Audiobooks, it needs to have a home 15:43:22 … who would like to adopt Sync Narration? 15:43:41 q+ 15:43:53 ivan: I think that formally [looks at his boss] we need to publish a formal and finished CG report 15:44:14 … then we have a draft we can use to carry the torch 15:44:39 … then the difficult question is do we feel confident enough to move it to the Rec track? 15:45:25 … my personal feeling is that this WG charter ends in approx a year, we need to discuss (in Fukuoka) what we want after the charter ends 15:45:52 … I would think that this is a document that can go in the Rec track in a renewed charter 15:46:19 … for the time being, we would need to refer to this document as an informal document 15:46:50 q+ 15:46:52 … a next step is to take over the document from the CG and republish it as a WG Note to say that it's important to this community 15:47:06 present+ laurent 15:47:08 ack laudrain 15:47:19 laudrain: the European Accessbility Act has been voted by the EU Commission 15:47:29 q? 15:47:48 … one of the thing it includes is that if an ebooks has an audio equivalent it needs to be synchronized 15:48:02 … so it will be mandatory around 2025 15:48:12 ack Avneesh 15:48:42 Avneesh: a process-oriented quesition: we know that the accessibility horizontal review relies on sync narration, is it important if it is a Rec track document or not? 15:49:05 Ralph: the horizontal reviewers may not object, but transition to Rec can be difficult 15:49:34 George: when you have an audiobook we know it's not fully accessible (it's a specialized publication) 15:49:49 … it doesn't address the issue mentioned by Luc, correct? 15:49:56 laudrain: yes 15:50:35 tzviya: we should try to avoid being stricter than is necessary 15:50:52 q? 15:51:35 q+ 15:51:41 … we don't want to box ourselves in a corner, we know we want to achieve global accessibility, but if can only get that in a year with Rec track documents we can already reach miletsones 15:51:44 ack garth 15:51:48 … we need to accomplish what we can 15:52:19 garth: coming back to what Luc said, what do you mean by sycnhronized? sentence level? word level? 15:52:37 laudrain: the directive doesn't specify the details, I think at least at the file level 15:52:55 … the community will decide what to recommend 15:53:23 garth: if the publisher has the digital rights to an ebook and not the audio ? 15:53:41 laudrain: I understand it has to be synchronized when both are in the same ebook 15:53:58 wendyreid: we need to explore finding a home for Sync Narration 15:54:14 action: wendyreid to find a home for the Synchronized Narration spec 15:54:44 marisa: I have a lot of action items related to finishing the draft 15:55:02 action: marisa to complete the drafts of explainers and specs 15:55:36 Topic: audiobook previews 15:55:44 scribenick: dauwhe 15:56:09 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NFBFWcDmLuF1VrEtMC7v9Z7JVOYrUWg6pi5eOmLFJ5U/edit#slide=id.p 15:56:29 garth: I have four slides on audiobook samples 15:56:58 ... Google Play Books needs to provide samples for customer previews 15:57:05 ... to help people make purchase decisions 15:57:14 ... sometimes it's a percentage of the content 15:57:19 NickRuffilo has joined #pwg 15:57:30 ... sometimes they just want to hear the narrator's voice 15:57:37 laurent_ has joined #pwg 15:57:55 ... publishers are willing for samples to be given away for free 15:58:11 rkwright has joined #pwg 15:58:15 ... it's usually 10% or 5%, but ten percent of a super-long book is not desireable 15:58:30 ... so publishers might want to be able to set the sample size on a per-title basis 15:58:55 ... or there might be bespoke samples with music, bells, whistles, etc 15:59:01 ... that's happening today 15:59:22 ... I would like our specification have a way to support this, so metadata could express what the publisher's desire is for sampling content 15:59:36 ... I thought about this while [redacted] 16:00:03 ... I'd like to talk about whether this is a good idea, and if my first thoughts are going in the right direction 16:00:32 ... often we think audio-specific stuff, and then later realize it's applicable to web publications 16:00:45 ... we need duration, either a time or percent 16:00:50 ... we might want a start position 16:00:56 present+ NickRuffilo 16:01:03 ... and a link to a bespoke sample 16:01:23 ... I've talked to our ingest people, and it seems to cover their use cases 16:01:32 q+ 16:01:45 [Nick Ruffilo arrives] 16:02:00 q+ 16:02:01 ... (outlines priority of these choices, depending what's present) 16:02:45 "bespoke" -- made for a partiular ustoer or user 16:03:00 (much chaos and merriment) 16:03:10 s/ ustoer/ customer/ 16:03:10 ... from a generic WP perspective 16:03:16 ... this stuff exists in EPUBland 16:03:29 ... most epubs at retail sites are sampleable 16:03:40 ... they usually start at the beginning, and have a percentage 16:03:49 ... we could use % for any type of publication 16:03:59 ... some way of setting start/end 16:04:15 ... and the ability to set a bespoke sample 16:04:31 q 16:04:33 q? 16:04:33 q+ 16:04:34 ... what I'd like to do before lunch 16:04:46 ... is see if this is a good idea 16:04:54 ... I think this is important for audio at least 16:04:58 Teenya has joined #pwg 16:05:09 q? 16:05:15 ... and should this be an audio thing or more general? 16:05:39 dauwhe: I have spent too much of my life making samples for ebooks 16:06:02 ... I have always avoided awkward endings of samples, not a good user experience, we need to address the end 16:06:14 garth: I think that's a good point 16:06:20 ... we do something to fudge it 16:06:54 q? 16:06:59 ack dauwhe 16:07:01 dauwhe: Other question I have, this is a business matter 16:07:12 +1 16:07:14 ... almost describing contractural matters with retailers 16:07:40 ... we run into this problem with EPUB, the metadata is ignored, would it be ignored in Audiobooks 16:07:51 ... would this better be communicated with ONIX (or similar) 16:07:59 garth: that's an interesting point 16:08:08 q+ 16:08:08 ... this gets done haphazardly 16:08:19 q+ about the need for interop 16:08:27 ... there's nothing in ONIX now 16:08:35 ... it's not served well by any metadata now 16:08:47 ... so I decided this needed a better way, per title 16:08:49 q? 16:08:53 q+ 16:08:57 ack ivan 16:09:10 ivan: you won't be surprised if I think this should be WP-level 16:09:25 ... we already have a bunch of metadata we add to links wherever the links reside 16:09:33 ... in resources or in readingOrder 16:09:41 ... I think that's the right place for this information 16:09:49 ... each resource might have a sample begin/end 16:10:20 ... it could be in extra resources 16:10:38 ... what this metadata should be, and how it should be named, is a detail for later 16:10:49 ... the media fragment URLs are great because you can have intervals 16:11:01 ... but there is not yet something like that for textual HTML 16:11:11 ... except for selectors, which can select an interval 16:11:11 q+ 16:11:23 q+ 16:11:46 garth: the thing with textual selectors, if this wants to be a WP concept it needs to flow across HTML resources 16:11:56 ack tzviya 16:11:57 ... begin and end might do that, for diffferent files in reading order 16:12:13 tzviya: I echo Dave's concerns 16:12:14 q- 16:12:19 rkwright has joined #pwg 16:12:19 http://www.idpf.org/epub/previews/ 16:12:21 ... we tried this with EPUB, we had the EPUB preview spec 16:12:41 ... I'm concerned we'll have the same problem--spending energy writing a spec that everyone ignores 16:12:59 ... today, every retailer has a previewing mechanism; some will allow publisher overrides 16:13:06 ack geoffjukes 16:13:12 Nellie has joined #pwg 16:13:18 geoffjukes: the metadata you have fits our use cases 16:13:31 ... we produce original content and redistribute other content 16:13:36 q+ 16:13:41 ... we get lots of custom samples 16:13:53 ... that have different contractual information 16:14:05 ... and not all books are created equal 16:14:11 ... we generate thousands of samples 16:14:25 ... and there is an accepted amount of time, it works out to 5min of audio 16:14:43 ... and most people don't listen to the end, they mostly just want to sample the narrator 16:14:52 ... we also sample based on the longest track 16:15:06 ... and we never do the beginning of the book because it's not real content 16:15:27 ... from a redistribution perspective; we receive samples via ONIX url or physical MP3 16:15:48 ... most of our partners like samples as separate files 16:16:14 ... from a packaged audio book perspective, it doesn't make sense for us to have it in metadata, but we don't do audiobook on web 16:16:32 zakim, who is here? 16:16:32 Present: tzviya, dkaplan, wendyreid, CharlesL, ivan, romain, Garth, dauwhe, Rachel, laudrain, marisa, Ralph_Swick, avneesh, george, tcole, mattg, franco, karen, david_stroup, 16:16:36 ... bigbluehat, duga, neelie, toshiakikoike, Andrea, danielweck, laurent, NickRuffilo 16:16:36 On IRC I see Nellie, laurent_, NickRuffilo, marisa, mattg, franco, danielweck, Karen, geoffjukes, ivan, laudrain, duga, Avneesh, romain, User2, leslie, timCole, JeremyMorse, Geeth, 16:16:36 ... George, Andrea, Ralph, david_stroup, Rachel, garth, RRSAgent, Zakim, wendyreid, dkaplan3, CharlesL, dauwhe, tzviya, plinss_, bigbluehat, astearns, dmitry, florian[m], Travis, 16:16:37 ... jyasskin 16:16:39 garth: I view, much like with EPUB, EPUB is most used as from publisher to retailer, then something happens after that 16:16:46 ... and to tzviya's comment 16:17:01 present+ Nellie 16:17:11 ... I thought it wasn't a finished spec, but point taken :) 16:17:13 present+ Franco 16:17:23 ... if this is getting traction, it's doing something new from the mess today 16:17:29 ... maybe we can do better 16:17:38 ack dauwhe 16:17:59 dauwhe: I am going to ask the Rachel question, what problem are we trying to solve, is there a need for interoperability here? 16:18:09 ... what is happening currently seems to work 16:19:02 garth: You may be right, but if we are starting from scratch, is this possibly worth doing? If the information came in the package, would it work? 16:19:10 ack leslie 16:19:30 leslie: this is a business issue, we set it at the account level, so when we change our mind we don't want to have to change files 16:19:37 garth: what about bespoke samples? 16:19:43 leslie: we don't usually do that 16:19:49 ack Nellie 16:19:55 ... maybe we should just spec the bespoke sample part 16:20:09 Nellie: Leslie and Geoff have presented interesting use cases 16:20:32 ... as an EPUB maker and file creator, are we talking about previews or samples? 16:20:51 q+ 16:20:53 ... previews are a thing with video etc on the web. A sample may be a different thing 16:21:02 ... with specific business uses 16:21:09 garth: and it was the preview spec :) 16:21:22 Nellie: I feel like the web publication standard is a response to EPUB 16:21:43 ... we know there have been issues around reading systems not supporting all the features of EPUB 16:22:03 ... but if you're moving to a more generic web standard, the possibility is greater for things working in a web environment 16:22:05 ack wendyreid 16:22:25 +1 to Nellie 16:22:27 wendyreid: I understand the arguments against this. I like the video preview idea 16:22:39 ... it's like a highlight reel, it's not the first five seconds 16:22:45 ... it's bespoke :) 16:23:05 ... the thing about audio is that they're not focusing on content, they are focusing on the narrator 16:23:15 ... and you don't care so much about the content 16:23:22 ... sa;oewi;oaiht4;oeit;i 16:23:33 ... there might be an argument for wanting that 30sec bespoke 16:23:53 q? 16:24:10 q+ 16:24:15 ... I think this is worth exploring, and it might not be used by everyone 16:24:31 garth: it could open a new market for Patrick Stewart to record all previews :) 16:24:35 ack ivan 16:24:38 ivan: in order to move on 16:24:55 ... I think garth or brady should come with a clear proposal pull request 16:25:01 ... this is what should be added to the spec 16:25:09 ... and then we can see if it works 16:25:36 garth: it seems like rough consensus that bespoke previews might be more valueable 16:25:44 ... I could make a proposal for that 16:25:59 q+ 16:26:17 action: garth to create PR for bespoke previews in WP 16:26:22 ack laudrain 16:26:38 laudrain: what is difference between web publication preview and entry page? 16:27:03 garth: I think of the entry page as the first page of content 16:27:15 ... the preview could be anything 16:27:25 wendyreid: it's lunchtime! 16:27:27 rrsagent, drat minutes 16:27:27 I'm logging. I don't understand 'drat minutes', ivan. Try /msg RRSAgent help 16:27:37 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:27:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-minutes.html ivan 16:27:47
16:48:34 duga has joined #pwg 16:52:42 Geeth has joined #pwg 16:53:14 mattg has joined #pwg 17:22:04 jeff has joined #pwg 17:23:53 duga has joined #pwg 17:24:57 CharlesL has joined #pwg 17:26:14 marisa has joined #pwg 17:26:41 Karen has joined #pwg 17:28:18 Geeth has joined #pwg 17:29:13 romain has joined #pwg 17:29:52 laudrain has joined #pwg 17:31:12 if people use mic 17:31:15 ivan has joined #pwg 17:31:26 Nellie has joined #pwg 17:31:31 scribenick: nickruffilo 17:31:43 present+ 17:31:48 Tzviya: topic: libraries and archiving. 17:32:04 Maurice: I'm at the U-Mich library and do IT there 17:32:20 Avneesh has joined #pwg 17:32:31 q+ 17:32:35 q- 17:32:38 q? 17:33:13 Jeremy: In the publishing division of the U-Mich library. Includes u-mich press 17:33:17 AUL = associate university librarian 17:34:54 Maurice: This is about us and where we come from. There are 6 divisions - IT, built HathiTrust digital library (16.9M volumes). We also have fulcrum, our publishing platform. 17:35:16 duga has joined #pwg 17:35:46 ivan_ has joined #pwg 17:35:46 ... we also have the University of Mich press, digital collections activities. We have the early-english books project - 125,000 books from 1475-1700. Creating structured text markup to make them searchable. 17:36:06 ... we have a large papyrus collection - all digitized and accessible. We work across a wide range spanning hundreds of years. 17:36:23 ... We would like to walk through our process and some of the challenges we face. 17:37:10 ... [narration over slide] The key question is working over long-term durability of content, as they work over hundreds of years. Preservation repo software and discovery are purpose-built with strict requirements 17:37:37 ... Items that don't meet requirements need to get stripped down. Going to walk through 7 examples 17:38:43 Jeremy: [image of a preservation advertisement 'preservation works!' on a restored building]. I'm always nervous that digital preservation isn't going to work, if we find out in the future that something fails... 17:39:24 ... We deal with many challenges. I'm a publisher and a preservationist. We publish new and reformated content into our preservation platform. Here are the challenges we see: 17:39:49 Andrea has joined #pwg 17:40:08 ... [content on slide] Linking and URIs. How do we create an archival package for a complex digital object that links to other objects on the open web that may not be preserved or stable. How do we implement graceful degredation? 17:41:25 ... there is a 3d webGL application embedded within the content. The text can be navigated independently of the webGL content. 17:42:56 ... There are interlinks between the webGL and the text, which takes you to specific locations. There are also interactive elements. These are all URLs. We're managing the text and the 3d content which ensures things will remain live... 17:43:45 ... from the content, we're linking to a database to get refined dig notes. In a print version, this would be added into the print, but instead of putting them in the epub, they are just linked out, but it is still considered essential data. 17:43:51 q+ to clarify between standardization problems and research problems 17:44:02 geoffjukes has joined #pwg 17:44:20 slides -> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/17n7XFW0wrefXF6bTaM6lO4Ru24XANrwzN5Gzw8qpzt0/edit#slide=id.p 17:44:48 ... Example 2 - how do we handle deep linking to content within a publication. Canonical fragments. I'm happy to hear about text-fragment selectors. 17:44:50 ack jeff 17:44:50 jeff, you wanted to clarify between standardization problems and research problems 17:45:37 Jeff: I wanted to get clear in my mind is standardization VS research. A standard problem is one where doing things the same way makes it easier for all, but a research problem is just "we have a hard problem and don't know how to solve it"... 17:46:00 ... When it comes to content disappearing - is it a standards or research problem. We need some deep thinking. What is the level of maturity of this issue? 17:46:37 Jeremy: I'd venture to say that it's new. I'm here to present problems, not solutions. There are quite a bit with RGIS data - where content is subordinate to the text... 17:47:07 ... There is certainly a pattern there and something we need to replicate. But it is not a mature problem. 17:47:36 q+ 17:47:40 Maurice: The particular problem of linking and URIs - and graceful degredation. There are many known solutions, but we lean towards a standard because it's so difficult to know which is best, so we lean to standards. 17:48:00 ack tzviya 17:48:00 Tzviya: That's the reason I want to chair the scolarly publishing group... 17:48:17 s/scholarly publishing/publishing 17:48:48 Jeremy: Annotations - how do we improve annotations in 3rd party systems. Hypothesis is using annotations well, so we're using them as a layer on top, but we'd like to possibly see a link back to publications... 17:49:04 q+ 17:49:16 ... There is now the hypothesis publisher group that will have annotations that can be part of the version of record - but this is something we don't have a plan for yet. 17:49:19 ack iv 17:50:10 marisa has joined #pwg 17:50:16 Ivan: On that front - withouth making negative comments - but because annotations are stored on the server - and implementation choice - the architecture with servers, annotations stored on those servers, is there. It becomes the implementations of that system - if you wanted those to be part of your ebook. It's a matter of implementations only... 17:50:18 q+ 17:50:39 Jeremy: Hypothesis appeals to us because it is a cloud service. We don't want to know identity of the user, etc... 17:51:03 Ivan: They could give you a tool that you set up yourself and you could get the info - they control the server, which is not required by the standard. 17:51:09 ack bigbluehat 17:52:02 Benjamin: Go to iAnnotate - thats where things get down to brass tacks. Most annotations are public domain, so they can be archived. It's your best bet to archive annotations with the publications themselves. 17:52:28 s/Benjamin/bigbluehat 17:53:36 Jeremy: Accessibility - many features are embedded, but some are provided by the access layer only. For the webGL content, we didn't attempt to make it accessible, but if you change the browser to mobile-mode, then it skips the map entirely... 17:54:05 ... So you get the same data, but not in visual form. We dont' know how to encode a different location - all done based off the ID out of the HREF. 17:55:12 ... Rights: how can we determine verifiable claims. If we misrepresent the trustworthiness of the archive or content. Some content may have more restrictive use after it has been archived. Licenses can change. 17:55:46 ... Sometimes we've had the metadata that had Creative Commons license but didn't have version on it, so we had to apply the latest version to it, but some was previous versions... 17:56:09 zakim, who is here? 17:56:09 Present: tzviya, dkaplan, wendyreid, CharlesL, ivan, romain, Garth, dauwhe, Rachel, laudrain, marisa, Ralph_Swick, avneesh, george, tcole, mattg, franco, karen, david_stroup, 17:56:12 ... bigbluehat, duga, neelie, toshiakikoike, Andrea, danielweck, laurent, NickRuffilo, Nellie, jeff 17:56:12 On IRC I see marisa, geoffjukes, Andrea, ivan_, duga, Avneesh, Nellie, laudrain, romain, Geeth, Karen, CharlesL, jeff, mattg, NickRuffilo, franco, User2, leslie, timCole, 17:56:12 ... JeremyMorse, George, Ralph, Rachel, garth, RRSAgent, Zakim, wendyreid, dkaplan3, dauwhe, tzviya, plinss_, bigbluehat, astearns, dmitry, florian[m], Travis, jyasskin 17:56:25 present+ geoffjukes 17:56:29 ... but our lawyer noted that use of that content under previous license is still permissable but new uses may not know which to enforce. But, if from a 3rd party, we can't track the versioning of that license. 17:57:12 Maurice: It's a complementary problem to deep linking. If you have complex packages with different digital content, you could have different URIs and different rights to each object. So the problem gets worse and worse. 17:57:16 david_stroup has joined #pwg 17:57:21 ... especially after 2 decades 17:58:20 Jeremy: Validation - how can we add preservation validation early into the process. There is content we produce - that's great, we can validate it and follow a spec. More and more of our content is created by scholars - we are more and more moving production outside of us... 17:58:51 ... so we want to provide better validation tools around the content so we reduce the iteration of telling the authors to change their works to validate. 18:00:00 ... Finally - packaging interactive maps. These are components with the epub, but authors need to know what it is they are going to transmit. We need a manifest which is part of the larger application. It's another example ... A web-like resource that could be organized in any way (a mini website). There is just a top-level HTML document. 18:00:32 ... When it's in a repo, and the type of leaflet is deprecated, I'd like to be able to update things in batch knowing their old convention and the new one. 18:00:37 q+ 18:00:51 ... those are the 7 examples, hopefully interesting. Any questions? 18:00:52 ack dkaplan 18:01:00 q+ to ask about the archiving community 18:01:09 1. Dynamic, even-if-local content (eg. embedded interactives, or rich visualizations based on manipulating large datasets) 18:01:09 2. Metadata questions in general: descriptive metadata authorities; the standard schema.org accessibility metadata; discovery and access; access rights; retention; preservation metadata. 18:01:09 2a. How much of this can or should be embedded in an object? 18:01:09 2b. If the metadata is in the object, can it be usfully used? Eg. 18:01:11 -- Can the preservation system query accessibility metadata in response to user query? 18:01:11 -- Can retention metadata be queried by a records management system? 18:01:11 -- Can embargos be parsed and enforced? 18:01:12 2c. Can metadata be updated in objects in the system? Does that modify audit trail? 18:01:12 3. Verifiability and provenance. 18:01:12 4. Versioning, versioning metadata, and change notification. Audit trails. 18:01:13 5. Defining the scope of a publication? 18:01:13 6. Documenting what's been lost in a lossy conversion (special case of preservation metadata) 18:01:13 7. File formats, format databases, and obsolete data 18:01:14 8. Live datasets as part of publications 18:01:19 laurent has joined #pwg 18:03:13 present+ 18:03:19 q? 18:03:30 q+ 18:05:01 ack jeff 18:05:01 jeff, you wanted to ask about the archiving community 18:05:06 q+ to talk about next steps 18:06:00 Jeff: Presumably an archivist could make decisions about all this - but I'm curious if you see a demand in the archival community that these things need to be standardized and what the view is? 18:06:39 Maurice: I think it's an excellent question and part of why we are here. Right now there is a big gap between the work going on in this group, with standards and the W3C more broadly, and the archiving community. 18:07:13 ... the preservation community has to catch things in the end. What often happens is a loss of content, or a loss of functionality. We lose alot over time. It damages the content, etc. 18:07:40 ... we are trying to look at the whole lifecycle and move the conversation to the early stage and engage better and solve things at a more holistic level. 18:07:44 ack laudrain 18:08:40 Laurent: An experiment we did with the french national library. It would not be archived without the metadata, so the file + metadata needed to be distributed as it would be to any vendor. This is done as an experiment with the context of a legal deposit. 18:09:07 ... The context is quite clear and the idea is unfortunately that what is archived is what is published first, but what about editions and versioning? 18:09:13 ack tzviya 18:09:13 tzviya, you wanted to talk about next steps 18:10:11 Tzviya: Ivan, Debra, and I put together a workshop on archiving. We pushed it out to next year but some (but not all) of the issues are already on our list to talk about. I think the point to discuss is what do we do with this information. Are there concrete next steps you want to see? 18:10:20 q+ 18:10:25 Jeremy: It's food for thought, I'm still learning how the group works. 18:10:29 s/Debra/Deborah/ 18:10:49 Maurice: Having conversations with karen and ivan - what are the opportunities to link the concerns 18:11:39 ... is there a way to strenghten the presence of library and archive within the W3C. They are both large communities, but they use different langauges, so it'll be unique to see the intersection. We need to figure out the important issues, and figure out how they incorporate, etc... 18:12:16 ... Particularly - organizing and working on the library side. We know our people - what's the best way to generate a presence and crosswalk for these important conversations 18:12:18 ack ivan_ 18:13:14 Ivan: I am wondering - we are in the phase where in a couple months we have to do a feature freeze. But that is not today. Would it be possible for you to look at the specification draft we have today to see if there are some entries / metadata that would be a high priority for you? 18:13:53 ... that we could feasibly add to what we have today. There are some issues, like external links that we cannot solve here and now - that goes beyond what we can do, but there might be other things that are simpler or more obvious that we could try to incorporate right now. Even if just to signal to the world that there are issues. 18:13:54 (btw for publishing people, a subset of archives standards, which are orthongonal to what we do but help you understand the archives mindset and where those specs are well-understood and developed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_Reuse_and_Exchange https://digitalarchive.mcmaster.ca/node/56 https://eac.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/ https://www.loc.gov/ead/ http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/ (and these have broad uptake and adoption, a 18:13:54 nd are quite mature, mostly)) 18:13:54 q+ 18:14:05 ... and that we're trying to take it seriously and we're trying to lead the way 18:14:12 ack garth 18:14:15 ack geor 18:14:41 q+ 18:15:24 Maurice: We have to look at the longer term conversations, but it would be an interesting follow up and what it would look like. We'll get some of our folks to look at it. 18:16:33 George: When the epub spec went through ISO, accessibility was part of WCAG. It has benefits to archivists - where we've seen archives of collections just becoming image PDFs. But we provide information that textual content is available. Continue to having the accessibility metadata as it describes content well. 18:16:59 ... I think all specifications should have accessibility provisions. The schema.org accessibility data should make its way into our spec. 18:17:02 ack timCole 18:18:03 Tim: We make extensive use of schema.org in the spec. This group knows onix as a metadata scheme. There are different types of resource types that might be helpful. 18:18:23 q+ 18:19:08 Jeremy: there's no way to describe relationship of resources of links. So each record has a DOI, but items could be links - so there is no way to show that something is a child link, or that one link is equivalent to a specific resource. One way to express relationships within links. 18:19:11 ack dkaplan 18:20:00 Deborah: This is one of those places where the W3C and publishing community (archives community) the fact is that the archives community has a very robust, well established set of standards and specs that it uses internally. It's young and has less adoption but the OAI RAE... 18:20:45 ... It's probably not exactly what we need here, but it is the fact where the archives community has a robust and practical (based on reserach) history of describing what is important - so it's a good starting point especially relationships. 18:20:49 s /RAE/ORE 18:21:14 ... the archives community has done the work and the research and written and adopted a spec. Instead of inventing a wheel for a need, we can borrow or use a wheel from the exising archives community. 18:21:16 q? 18:21:57 Maurice: Great point - the possibility here is for a really rich 2-way conversation. What can we bring from the W3C world and from the Archives community. Both communities are standards oriented so how can we be productive 18:22:18 q+ 18:22:19 Wendy: Anything else? An action item? 18:22:28 ack jeff 18:22:38 scribejs, set Maurice Maurice York 18:22:48 s/OAI RAE/OAI-ORE (Open Archives Initiative Object Reuse and Exchange)/ 18:22:58 Jeff: In terms of next steps it sounds like there is a workshop happening next year. Also - I'm not sure if the archive community has a community group, but it would be a great way to get some communications going at the W3C... 18:23:21 ... it doesn't address all the items that could be shoehorned in, but i want to make sure we get started on some longer-term things as well. 18:24:07 Wendy: Ok - 2 items. One to have the two of you write a proposal for the things you'd like to see that you don't see today. The second is a much larger effort to create your own community group or present to the publishing community group as a task force. 18:24:39 ...: Jeremy/Maurice - will you take the action item to write the proposal? 18:24:51 action: jeremy to write a proposal to the WPUB on changes 18:25:04 ... Does someone want to ressurect the old archive group or making a proposal to the publishing group? 18:25:49 Ivan: Maurice and Jeremy - lets chat at some point. The 4 of us can sit down and figure out what the community group would mean, how to set it up, to see if it makes sense. 18:26:00 mgarrish has joined #pwg 18:26:10 there are two, neither quite perfect but both related: Live search by group name: x Sort by title 18:26:10 Sort by creation date Sort by no. of participants 18:26:10 Show community groups Show business groups Expand all groups 18:26:10 Collapse all groups 3 Groups found 18:26:12 18:26:13 18:26:13 18:26:13 18:26:14 18:26:15 18:26:15 18:26:15 18:26:16 18:26:16 18:26:17 18:26:17 18:26:17 18:26:18 18:26:19 18:26:19 18:26:19 18:26:20 18:26:20 18:26:21 18:26:21 18:26:21 18:26:22 18:26:23 Robustness and Archiving 18:26:23 Web Archivability 18:26:32 [Robustness and archiving CG might be a place to find more participants --> https://www.w3.org/community/irobar/participants 18:26:46 action: ivan to set up discussions with Karen, Jeremy, Maurice on an archival CG 18:26:57 also there is Web Archivability. 18:27:20 scribenick: jeff 18:27:52 https://github.com/w3c/pwpub/issues/45 18:28:05 Topic: open issues 18:28:07 Topic: Open issues 18:28:10 Subtopic: what is the origin of a Web publication 18:28:21 Wendy: Gist of problem is about origin 18:28:26 ... can we use at base; 18:28:30 q+ 18:28:36 ... does it interfere with doc URLs. 18:28:48 Laurent: Main question is whether to first speak about packaging 18:28:50 q- 18:28:52 ... session later 18:28:57 ... but should come first 18:29:26 https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/409 18:29:35 Subtopic: manifest files 18:29:41 issue- 409 18:29:43 Subtopic: Manifest files need their own MIME Media Type 18:29:44 We missed out seeking resolution for text equivalent for audio books. We should list in issues to be discussed today or tomorrow. 18:29:46 https://github.com/w3c/pwpub/issues/44 18:30:05 https://http.cat/409 18:30:31 Benjamin: Create a mime type for manifest files 18:30:42 ... have operational set of actions 18:30:57 ... convert from author moa=anifest to canonical manifest 18:30:59 ... user needs 18:31:05 ... beyond json.parse 18:31:14 ... beyond graph representation 18:31:22 ... 2 expressed formats 18:31:27 ... operationally different 18:31:41 ... so if people implement canincialization process 18:31:46 ... we need a new media type 18:31:59 ... wpub + json or some such 18:32:06 ... as activity streams people did 18:32:14 ... beyond json-ld 18:32:24 ... needed their own media type 18:32:36 ... we should do the same for both authored and canonica 18:32:43 q+ 18:32:51 ack ivan_ 18:33:27 Ivan: This is the issue about which we say "specification purity less important than good of community" 18:33:46 ... the authored manifest; if not using LD + JSON media type 18:33:57 ... then will be ignored by schema.org processors 18:34:04 ... killing its raison d'etre 18:34:09 ... should not touch MT 18:34:14 ... could add profile 18:34:20 ... for whatever reason 18:34:34 ... we could decide to give a differnt MT to canonical manifest 18:34:42 ... but CM can be used as AM 18:34:45 ... same formate 18:34:49 ... same data 18:34:59 ... so should not be different MT 18:35:20 ... strinctly speaking CM and AM have different RDF representations 18:35:29 ... but that is specification purity 18:35:36 ... backfire on practicality 18:36:11 ... schema.org processors say something is a URI or stream 18:36:19 ... we accept the lack of purity 18:36:22 q+ 18:36:46 ... we should not touch 18:36:54 ack bigbluehat 18:36:57 Benjamin: profile = does not solve the issue 18:37:05 ... for schema.org; it is ignored 18:37:24 ... JSON - LD.js going into Chrome lighthouse 18:37:34 ... so they use json-ld going forward 18:37:46 ... if we don't go through some process 18:37:59 ... they are equivalent in doc; but not really 18:38:06 ... so pub has different states of meaning 18:38:11 ... authored v consumed 18:38:39 ... If Wiley takes Moby Dick as authored get one result 18:38:51 ... through canonicalization has different meaning 18:39:03 ... could do what schema.org does 18:39:11 ... but how does an implementor know? 18:39:16 q+ 18:39:42 ack tzviy 18:39:48 Tzviya: Is there a way to end the stalemate? 18:40:19 Ivan: Say the authored manifest must use schema.org creative work 18:40:26 ... or a subtype thereof 18:40:42 ... could define a separate type and demand that it is @@ 18:40:51 ... we signal it is not just a creative work 18:40:57 ... also a web pub 18:41:06 ... needs canonicalization to get web pub features 18:41:09 github-bot has joined #pwg 18:41:15 ... the type is an array of types 18:41:21 ... AB, VBs 18:41:33 ... this works and answers concerns 18:41:58 q+ 18:42:00 Laurent: I fear it would be an abuse of the mechanism of context types in schema.org 18:42:16 ... used to indicate properties within a structure 18:42:17 q+ 18:42:28 IVan: It's an RDF type... no more 18:42:37 ack timCole 18:42:47 Tim: schema.org defines additional type property 18:42:51 ... can be used for this 18:42:55 laurent has joined #pwg 18:43:00 ... make sure schema.org understands 18:43:07 ... could do an extension 18:43:14 ... as long as not primary 18:43:21 Ivan: A subtype of creative work? 18:43:25 Tim: An extension 18:43:33 ... creative type by inheritance 18:43:48 ... external vocabulary 18:43:53 ack bigbluehat 18:44:00 Ivan: A schema.org syntactic hack 18:44:09 Benjamin: This came from canonicalization 18:44:15 ... not to express more 18:44:20 ... VC has a processing model 18:44:27 ... an intended use for data models 18:44:40 ... equivalent to using json - ld parser 18:44:48 ... but we have two types: AM and CM 18:45:00 ... a consumer does not know what you have 18:45:05 ... you are left wondering 18:45:21 ... it may be a question of who runs canconicalization 18:45:34 ... publisher does not want messy author thing 18:45:37 q+ 18:45:43 ... we want a canonicalized thing 18:45:46 q? 18:45:49 ... developer won't know 18:45:54 ack ivan_ 18:45:55 ack ivan_ 18:46:03 ... will consume messy thing wrong 18:46:13 Ivan: Your solution works in an ideal world 18:46:19 ... too high for publishers 18:46:20 q+ 18:46:23 ... need to lower the bar 18:46:32 ... (except Wiley) 18:46:40 ... there are self-publishers, etc. 18:46:45 q+ 18:46:46 ... we want a simple manifest 18:47:00 ... requiring caninical manifest not realistic 18:47:16 Wendy: I don't hear the conclusion 18:47:31 ... can the paricipants work it out? 18:47:40 ack bigbluehat 18:47:42 Ben: Developers can be smaller than Wiley 18:47:54 ... but the technology does not say when to use CM 18:47:59 ... signal what processing to do 18:48:09 ... today; nothing that distinguishes 18:48:14 ... no clarity about process 18:48:30 ... different from structured data testing tool 18:48:41 ... need to signal when to execute 18:48:48 q? 18:48:51 ack George 18:48:59 George: Does a wpub check resolve this problem? 18:48:59 q+ 18:49:11 Ben: "The tools will save us" 18:49:12 ack mattg 18:49:26 Matt: You always run the canonicalization 18:49:33 q+ 18:49:41 ... but maybe nothing to do to AM if everything is already there 18:49:49 ... don't bypass 18:50:38 Ivan: Can clarify doc to say "when reading system turns AM into abstracted web idl, in that process it canonicalizes the manifest and converts to JS classes" 18:50:39 q? 18:51:00 q+ 18:51:00 ... if AM is complete, then canonicalization is the empty set 18:51:36 Ben: The way you know to run that is linkrel 18:51:45 ... SEO bots will get something different 18:51:49 ... the AM output 18:51:49 ack bigbluehat 18:52:01 ... which will differ and may not be found 18:52:04 ack romain 18:52:11 Romain: To George's question 18:52:28 ... epub checking very different 18:52:38 ... on web, content is not validated 18:52:52 ... don't require valid content 18:53:02 ... so future web pub checker cannot be used this way 18:53:05 ... just a hint 18:53:21 ... user agents won't request content 18:53:29 s/hint/lint 18:53:29 George: You can require consistency 18:53:42 Romain: But you can have content fail; OK for the web 18:53:51 q+ 18:53:56 Wendy: Do not see consensus 18:54:04 ... need working the issue + referee 18:54:34 Ben: Ivan and Matt have pointed out that canonicalization only targets wpub processors 18:55:05 ack bigbluehat 18:55:07 ... they are looking for rel relationship and and abstracting it 18:55:11 ... so we are ok 18:55:24 ... seo bots and post processors will be confused, but that's ok 18:55:30 ... we can close the issue 18:55:39 ... do not need a media type 18:55:48 Wendy: Can you formalize that proposal 18:56:09 ... (Issue #44 is for tomorrow) 18:56:52 PROPOSAL: the rel="publication" discovery mechanism will be what signals the need for canonicalization/processing 18:57:01 +1 18:57:05 +1 18:57:06 +1 18:57:06 +1 18:57:07 +1 18:57:08 +1 18:57:08 +1 18:57:09 +1 18:57:10 +1 18:57:11 +1 18:57:12 just make it stop! 18:57:12 +1 18:57:14 +1 18:57:27 laurent has joined #pwg 18:57:34 RESOLVED: the rel="publication" discovery mechanism will be what signals the need for canonicalization/processing 18:57:36 Wendy: So resolved 19:00:20 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:01:30 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:02:18 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:03:01 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:03:58 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:04:46 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:19:44 geoffjukes has joined #pwg 19:30:59 mattg has joined #pwg 19:34:38 Avneesh has joined #pwg 19:36:06 laudrain has joined #pwg 19:37:11 geoffjukes has joined #pwg 19:37:11 ivan has joined #pwg 19:37:14 zakim, pick a victim 19:37:14 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Rachel 19:37:22 zakim, pick a victim 19:37:22 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose karen 19:37:28 zakim, pick a victim 19:37:28 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose neelie 19:37:36 Nellie has joined #pwg 19:38:04 scribenick: Nellie 19:38:08 q? 19:38:13 scribenick: nellie 19:38:26 present+ Nellie 19:38:55 wendyreid: The audiobook spec has been cleaned up 19:39:25 https://w3c.github.io/audiobooks/ 19:39:31 ... the only question is the packaging problem 19:39:45 marisa has joined #pwg 19:39:49 q+ 19:39:54 q? 19:39:59 ... it likely does not block the push to WD 19:40:03 ack ivan 19:40:47 duga has joined #pwg 19:40:51 ivan: compared to most public WD, it's way beyond the usual state and should probably be pushed. 19:41:35 Proposal: Publish the Editor's Draft of the Audiobooks Profile of WP 19:41:50 laurent has joined #pwg 19:42:06 For Laurant: http://meet.google.com/vje-abzq-xts 19:42:16 s/Lauarant/Laurent 19:42:33 Proposal: publish the editor's draft of the audiobooks profile of WP as a First public working draft, shorname should be 'audiobooks' 19:42:42 dauwhe: there is concern amongst the general publishing community that there isn't a problem to solve here 19:42:50 s/shorname/shortname/ 19:42:55 ... he doesn't see adoption being driven. 19:43:00 +1 19:43:38 wendyreid: has done work to talk to publishers, and the current state is based on who has been willing to talk with her. 19:43:41 +1 to dauwhe 19:43:57 q+ 19:43:59 Geeth has joined #pwg 19:44:13 q+ 19:44:21 ... the european publishers have been very keen on this; Canadians have been interested but wary; USA doesn't see a problem. 19:44:40 ack duga 19:44:42 ack duga 19:45:14 q+ 19:45:15 duga: it was a lot of work to sort through the various formats that were being dumped on them. 19:45:22 Andrea has joined #pwg 19:45:26 q? 19:45:33 q+ 19:45:49 ack leslie 19:45:56 ...An example of a problem this would solve: they can't accept TOCs, because they get TOCs in spreadsheet form. 19:46:36 leslie: not the same situation as with ebooks, because publishers don't deal with the pain directly. 19:46:48 adoption from Google, that duga assumes we would get, is a very consequential adoption. 19:46:53 ... there are middlemen who've founded their whole business on cleaning up messes, who likely won't cooperate. 19:46:54 s/assumes/implies/ 19:47:19 q+ 19:47:36 ... so, there's much that makes sense in the spec, but it'll be a hard sell. A meeting or working session with the Audio Publishers Association is likely in order. 19:47:45 +1 to co-coordinating with the larger audio publishing groups 19:47:45 ack George 19:48:01 Audio Publishers Association - https://www.audiopub.org/ 19:48:17 George: There should be a tool to help publishers get their content into this format. 19:48:42 ... TOC gives them a path to do more, which should be attractive. 19:49:03 ... Would like to see page numbers and accessibility added to the spec. 19:49:07 ack Avneesh 19:49:30 q+ 19:49:41 Avneesh: issue #44 is still pending -- should we resolve it before sending the draft? 19:49:53 ack tzviya 19:49:59 q+ 19:50:12 tzviya: we hope to resolve issue #44 tomorrow. 19:50:30 ... page list is part of the spec now, and many of the accessibility features are built in already. 19:51:11 ... Re: collaboration, attempts have been made to work with the Audio Book Association, without much success. If anyone can provide a connection, that would be greatly appreciated. 19:51:34 ... Geoff Jukes joining the group has been a big win, but is just a start. 19:51:41 ack ivan 19:52:13 ivan: for the first public working draft, its ok to leave some issues unsolved 19:52:21 ack laudrain 19:52:24 ... but references to any open issues should be included in the document 19:52:29 ack laudrain 19:53:13 laudrain: Hachette Livre is very interested in a new format/spec for audiobooks, particularly for metadata, so that they can add more info like keywords. 19:53:24 Proposal: publish the editor's draft of the audiobooks profile of WP as a First public working draft, shortname should be 'audiobooks' 19:53:36 +1 19:53:36 +1 19:53:37 +1 19:53:38 +1 19:53:38 q+ 19:53:38 +1 19:53:38 +1 19:53:39 +1 19:53:39 +1 19:53:41 +1 19:53:42 +1 19:53:43 +1 19:53:47 +1 19:53:48 q- 19:53:58 +1 19:54:04 +1 19:54:11 Resolved: publish the editor's draft of the audiobooks profile of WP as a First public working draft, shortname should be 'audiobooks' 19:54:12 +1 19:54:13 +1 19:54:36 q+ 19:54:46 ack jeff 19:54:48 ivan: practical things: he will be at a conference in San Francisco next week, so won't be available to act on this before/during that period. 19:54:56 q+ 19:55:37 jeff: Wondering at a higher level what the plan is to get more people involved and drive adoption 19:56:23 ... About 6 months ago, they thought we'd get more impact by focusing on audiobooks, but is now concerned about larger strategy given the feedback about lack of interest in adoption 19:56:28 q+ to ask if the Publishing CG would be better (for now) 19:56:48 ... So, can those companies who are enthusiastic about this reach out to other companies, and help to push this forward? 19:57:28 i/ The audiobook spec has been cleaned up/Topic: Audiobooks/ 19:57:33 wendyreid: Has made herself very available to talk to publishers and the APA. The last update she got was that they are very concerned about anti-trust, but she hasn't heard from them in a couple months. 19:58:08 q? 19:58:14 ack leslie 19:58:36 q+ 19:58:43 leslie: There shouldn't be an antitrust issue, and she'd love to be able to push for an in-person meeting about this with the APA, via the big publishers who are already onboard. 19:59:40 ack bigbluehat 19:59:40 bigbluehat, you wanted to ask if the Publishing CG would be better (for now) 19:59:42 mgarrish has joined #pwg 20:00:17 q+ 20:00:18 bigbluehat: We have the publishing community group onboard now, so this seems like a potential opportunity to organize a community group. 20:00:30 ack garth 20:00:42 garth: A retreat to the community group doesn't seem like the right thing to do now 20:01:36 ... Amazon has never participated in epub, yet they continue to support it as an ingestion format. Similarly, if people just start giving this new format to distributors, they will begin to support it. 20:01:44 ack George 20:01:51 ... That said, he doesn't expect Amazon to ever participate in these kinds of meetings. 20:02:12 q+ 20:02:25 q? 20:02:49 George: If someone has a tool to demonstrate ingestion of this format, then we could make a demo video, showing the side-by-side comparison of the current messy process 20:03:04 ack tzviya 20:03:05 ... So, tooling would dramatically help with adoption. 20:03:28 tzviya: The EU is eager to adopt, so there likely won't be a problem there. 20:03:30 q? 20:03:53 ... So this isn't a case of creating a spec with no path for adoption -- there's an established group of adopters ready and waiting. 20:03:53 Topic: lightweight packaging 20:04:56 slides -> http://meet.google.com/vje-abzq-xts 20:05:55 laurent: Audiobook use cases: B2B, who need to distribute files to distributors, etc., to all supply channels. 20:06:34 ... For print disable people, and direct to consumer. 20:07:12 ... Goals: must be easy to author -- we really need some authoring software. 20:07:52 ... Must be usable for B2B supply chain, must be usable to replace pure audio, and must be usable for B2C 20:08:57 ... Even if EPUB3 isn't going to be replaced, there are still use cases. E.g., an academic who wants to put together a long article, package it, and send it out to a publisher. 20:09:59 ... Out of scope: Synchronized media, DRM, and WP to LPF conversion 20:10:37 What is this package? A zip, that has a primary entry page, a json manifest (possibly embedded in the entry page), a cover, contents, and supplemental contents 20:11:22 ... Where we are: pretty close to finalization. See the link in slides for the draft spec. 20:12:11 ... There are some remaining open issues: LPF processor: what requirements apply to these processors? and what happens if there is a reference to something in the manifest that is not in the package? 20:12:28 ... And what should happen if there are extra resources in the package? 20:12:46 ... Once we wrap up these conformance requirements, we should be done. 20:13:19 ... Another question: Is there something in the package that can be called a "base url" or "origin" 20:13:29 q+ 20:13:30 q+ 20:13:32 q+ 20:13:35 ... Maybe we can talk about those issues. 20:13:45 ack ivan 20:14:24 q+ 20:14:34 ivan: A comment for those who aren't familiar: this packaging format is NOT on recommendation track, so it'll end up as a working draft but not a recommendation. 20:14:47 ack tzviya 20:15:13 tzviya: The main feedback from TAG: we need to explain/understand better why we're going with zip rather than an existing packaging format that's widely used on the web 20:15:41 ... So part of what we need to accomplish in this F2F is to put together a better explanation/understanding to put out into the world 20:16:03 scribenick: duga 20:16:12 ack CharlesL 20:16:20 q+ 20:16:28 Charles: What about something like epubcheck? 20:17:18 George: Assuming any links in toc point to audio file with time offset 20:17:31 q+ 20:17:35 ack George 20:17:45 ... assumes files are gathered and dumped into a folder in package 20:17:59 ... concerned that we have lost URLs to original files 20:18:13 q+ to ask about the implementer audience 20:18:13 q? 20:18:13 ack mattg 20:18:14 ... for roundtripping, do we have a way to preserve those? 20:18:32 ack ivan 20:18:43 ivan: Should remember this is not a replacement for full-blown web packaging 20:18:48 ... that is why it is a note 20:19:06 ... doing this because web packaging spec isn't ready, this is stopgap 20:19:29 ... This is one of the things that web packaging should give you 20:19:34 q+ 20:19:36 q+ 20:20:02 ... beyond our charter to produce web packaging spec 20:20:18 ... this is lightweight because it does the minimum 20:21:17 ... can't put full web publication in this package. Just have to accept that 20:21:35 mattg: Don't want to bikeshed but ... 20:21:50 ... is lightweight really conveying what we want? 20:22:02 ... should we discuss today? 20:22:05 q? 20:22:19 q? 20:22:21 ivan: Yes, we should discuss today or tomorrow 20:22:24 ack bigbluehat 20:22:24 bigbluehat, you wanted to ask about the implementer audience 20:22:24 ack bigbluehat 20:22:36 q- 20:23:01 bigbluehat: Packaging format so far is targeted to a publisher distribution model 20:23:16 ... not webby, and may be fine (may never be on the web) 20:23:53 +1 20:24:04 ... Could exist in this distribution format, could exist in some webby sort of thing later 20:24:19 q+ 20:24:23 q? 20:24:30 ... Make clear we are not trying to make something that can package web stuff 20:25:14 ... Have concerns about introducing a new zip format (next to epub) 20:25:23 ack romain 20:25:30 q+ 20:25:53 romain: Note so not rec track, but still need to be careful about language 20:26:09 ... "exposed" is not a well defined term 20:26:25 ack laurent 20:26:34 ... Need to be clear for UA requirements 20:26:46 laurent: Agree not webby 20:27:05 ... Disagree that "it's only a zip, just throw in what you want" 20:27:16 ... need a little more. Need a manifest. 20:27:39 ... Need to specify the files names and formats, even if it is not a web package 20:27:42 q+ 20:27:50 ack ivan 20:27:59 ... Also agree wtih romain that this needs more specification 20:28:16 ivan: Want to avoid going to the other extreme 20:28:37 q+ 20:28:41 ... True, not a web format. But to say it is not useful for web publications goes too far 20:29:05 ... there are a number of web pubs that could be placed in this package 20:29:11 ... eg scholarly article 20:30:06 ... also eg the HTML spec 20:30:21 ... the only non-relative references are to CSS 20:31:04 ... (to stylesheets, not the css spec) 20:31:06 ack garth 20:31:24 laurent has joined #pwg 20:31:30 q+ 20:31:38 garth: Utility is highest in distribution world 20:32:04 ... don't want to put this effort into a standard OCF from epub 20:32:16 ... the content isn't epub, lots of differences 20:32:34 ... we are now more webby 20:32:36 q+ to attempt a summary 20:32:37 q? 20:32:56 ack George 20:32:57 George: In agreement with what has been said 20:33:22 ... the tool that tends to make these puts everything in a big folder 20:33:34 ... LCFing those is pretty straightforward 20:33:55 ... it would be easy to turn that into a web pub in the future 20:34:12 ack bigbluehat 20:34:37 bigbluehat: Once these things exist and you get a .lpf (or whatever), who opens this? What do you expect to run? 20:35:03 ... Why isn't this an appendix in web pub spec with a list of names to use if you zip it? 20:35:12 q+ 20:35:31 ... The only reason for these specs is to say what files you should look for after you unzip it 20:35:31 q+ 20:35:57 ... What do we expect to open these, and what do we think they should do once they open it? 20:36:36 ... Need a new package format to do interesting things like properly hook up offline annotations 20:37:02 q+ 20:37:14 ... if this is just distribution, you just zip it up and send it wherever, and whoever receives it just does whatever they want with those files 20:37:26 ack ivan 20:37:29 ... Just need to have some well defined names 20:37:44 ivan: Completely agree! Could be an informative appendix 20:37:51 marisa has joined #pwg 20:38:02 ... but it is already so big that adding this as an appendix makes it unmanageable 20:38:21 ... editors are even now wondering if the existing spec should be split up 20:38:23 +1 for making WPUB multiple docs each with their own value(s) 20:38:56 ... making laurent do this is just more efficient than leaving it to the current editors 20:39:07 ack tzviya 20:39:07 tzviya, you wanted to attempt a summary 20:39:16 a? 20:39:17 tzviya: We seem to be spinning in circles 20:39:19 q? 20:39:27 ... will try to summarize 20:39:39 q- 20:39:49 ... not really resolved, which is surprising 20:39:56 ... we do need to respond to the TAG 20:40:18 laurent: many things were about the profile, not just the packaging 20:40:31 ... there are webby and non webby parts 20:40:49 tzviya: Maybe packaging is a bad name, might consider distribution 20:40:55 q? 20:40:57 ... Testing plans 20:41:06 Topic: Implementations, testing plans, CR 20:41:11 ... our testing champion is gone 20:41:14 q+ 20:41:18 q+ 20:41:31 ... need tests for everything 20:41:35 q+ 20:41:38 ack timCole 20:42:00 ivan: What does testing mean? 20:42:08 ... depends on which part of the spec 20:42:20 ... first, manifest for specific metadata 20:42:38 ... what does it mean to move a vocab to CR 20:43:08 ... have to prove that any term we define, we have at least 2 potential users who use or intend to use that term 20:43:16 ... to show that every term makes sense 20:43:55 Ralph: As you go into CR you expect that before rec there will be at least 2 users of each spec 20:43:55 ack ivan 20:43:57 ack dauwhe 20:44:10 dauwhe: Can I just build a JS implementation? 20:44:14 tzviya: Yes 20:44:23 Ralph: Not sure that really meets the intent 20:44:24 s/yes// 20:44:54 crowd: What do you mean?! 20:45:17 wendyreid: Calibrio has agreed to do an audiobooks implementation 20:45:28 ... but we need to define exactly what we need from them 20:45:35 q+ 20:45:35 s/calibrio/colibrio 20:45:54 romain has left #pwg 20:46:06 tzviya: Isn't there a test subgroup that worked on this? 20:46:15 q+ 20:46:23 romain has joined #pwg 20:46:26 Ralph: The question is what does testing a vocab mean 20:46:50 ... essentially there is both a producer and consumer, and somewhere along the line the is a term that is produced and consumed 20:47:15 dauwhe: Not sure how we red/green test "a toc should be processed" 20:47:34 ack laurent 20:47:56 laurent: Readium committed to audiobook implementations 20:48:16 ... there will be a way to injest an lpf file 20:48:52 ack mattg 20:49:40 mattg: There are some things we can't explicitly test, have to rely on people 20:50:06 ... what happens when you read the json on the primary entry page? How does that relate to the whole pub? 20:50:08 q+ 20:50:13 ... may need to look at that again 20:50:29 ack bigbluehat 20:50:51 bigbluehat: We did a spec once (web app spec) 20:51:05 ... did validation tests, did run automatically 20:51:17 ... just hoped people would implement it and test 20:51:22 ... it is just a validation spec 20:51:32 s/web app sec/web annotations spec/ 20:51:39 ... There are a few musts, so we can do those tests 20:52:06 ... there isn't much that is user spacing 20:52:15 ... and a blank white page is a legal web pub 20:52:36 q? 20:52:40 q+ 20:52:47 the ToC algorithm is testable too, although not normative, so :shrug: 20:52:56 ... there is no requirement that we have a linear nav. It is hard to test eg "can you get to page 2" 20:52:58 ack ivan 20:53:32 ivan: In Lyon we discussed "minimum viable reader". Really minimal stuff we expect an implementation to do 20:53:46 q+ 20:54:00 CharlesL has joined #pwg 20:54:16 ack dauwhe 20:54:18 ... We can test the minimal set. We stopped, but maybe we should revisit as a test harness 20:54:33 dauwhe: Looking for musts, it is all about information processing 20:54:45 s/the ToC algorithm is testable too, although not normative, so :shrug:// 20:55:07 ack bigbluehat 20:55:18 q+ to summariza 20:55:19 bigbluehat: Discovery is another thing we can do 20:55:43 ... for web pubs, there is an entry point file (which is also the identifier), which must have a rel 20:56:07 ... that points at some json which must have some things, that can then be canoncicalized 20:56:07 q+ 20:56:35 ... maybe can check if some terms are properly set. Can test all those things 20:56:50 ack romain 20:57:08 ... 2 days to 2 months depending on how we implement 20:57:21 romain: Not exposed by UA, so can't really test 20:57:33 tzviya: Need some volunteers for testing 20:58:19 ... no one will test, so we will never release 20:58:34 ... Nellie can help, but not lead 20:58:47 ... need a minimal amount of testing 20:59:03 ... need someone to go through the spec and figure out what needs to be tested 20:59:10 ... look at the musts and shoulds 20:59:18 q? 20:59:20 ... and do what web annotations did 20:59:25 q+ 20:59:29 bigbluehat: No, that was too much effort 20:59:29 ack tzviya 20:59:29 tzviya, you wanted to summariza 20:59:38 jeff: Make the plan or tests? 20:59:43 tzviya: Both 20:59:51 jeff: break it down then 21:00:04 tzviya: Ok, anyone want to make the plan? 21:00:09 crickets: 21:00:24 q+ 21:00:32 bigbluehat: web annotations (and others) did mocha tests 21:00:35 q+ 21:01:00 q- 21:01:00 ... those are red/green tests, you either pass or fail 21:01:18 ... need to understand is this packaging? Or just wpub? 21:01:47 ... There is also some vagueness in the spec, need to understand if that is on purpose 21:01:58 ... the tests have to test the entire spec 21:02:23 ... audiobook tests would fail many wpub tests, so that needs it's own tests 21:02:40 dauwhe: Say we have a test plan 21:02:54 ... and some things that pass 21:03:08 ... we could end up with a web pub spec that does nothing and is unusable 21:03:21 q? 21:03:27 ack dauwhe 21:03:29 tzviya: We can discuss that depressing topic at dinner 21:03:39 laudrain has left #pwg 21:03:42 jeff: Positive spin on dauwhe's comments 21:03:56 ... this is a great opportunity to learn all about the spec! 21:04:00 laudrain has joined #pwg 21:04:16 ... The test plan people will prevent the terrible future that dauwhe predicts 21:04:46 tzviya: We are out of steam 21:05:21 ... tomorrow we will organize all that 21:05:42 garth: Start at 8 21:05:59 garth: get here at 8 at least 21:06:05 ... keep your badges! 21:08:08 rrsagent, draft minutes 21:08:08 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-minutes.html ivan 21:08:08 zakim, bye 21:08:08 rrsagent, bye 21:08:08 I see 13 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-actions.rdf : 21:08:08 ACTION: ivan to talk to david about WebIDL [1] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-26-22 21:08:08 ACTION: ivan to talk to david about Localizable strings [2] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-26-41 21:08:08 ACTION: tzviya to edit explainer about WAM [3] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-27-09 21:08:08 ACTION: mattg report back to dbaron that link rel value issue is resolved [4] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-28-46 21:08:08 ACTION: dauwhe obtaining manifest integrating with CORS explanation (?) - there is an open issue for resolution as well [5] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-29-53 21:08:08 ACTION: wendyreid better explain the packaging options we rejected and why [6] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-33-35 21:08:08 ACTION: wendyreid to talk to Tess on the audio explainer issues [7] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T13-47-32 21:08:08 ACTION: Ralph to ask PInG if someone can walk us through the questionnaire because we are without an expert [8] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T14-06-36 21:08:08 ACTION: wendyreid to find a home for the Synchronized Narration spec [9] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T15-54-14 21:08:08 ACTION: marisa to complete the drafts of explainers and specs [10] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T15-55-02 21:08:08 ACTION: garth to create PR for bespoke previews in WP [11] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T16-26-17 21:08:08 ACTION: jeremy to write a proposal to the WPUB on changes [12] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T18-24-51 21:08:08 ACTION: ivan to set up discussions with Karen, Jeremy, Maurice on an archival CG [13] 21:08:08 recorded in https://www.w3.org/2019/05/06-pwg-irc#T18-26-46 21:08:08 leaving. As of this point the attendees have been tzviya, dkaplan, wendyreid, CharlesL, ivan, romain, Garth, dauwhe, Rachel, laudrain, marisa, Ralph_Swick, avneesh, george, tcole, 21:08:08 Zakim has left #pwg 21:08:11 ... mattg, franco, karen, david_stroup, bigbluehat, duga, neelie, toshiakikoike, Andrea, danielweck, laurent, NickRuffilo, Nellie, jeff, geoffjukes 21:08:19 q- 21:08:58 CharlesL has left #pwg