16:21:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pwg
16:21:13 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/11/11-pwg-irc
16:21:17 <ivan> rrsagent, set log public
16:21:17 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Working Group Telco
16:21:17 <ivan> Chair: wendy
16:21:17 <ivan> Date: 2019-11-11
16:21:17 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2019Nov/0003.html
16:21:17 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Agenda 2019-11-11: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-publ-wg/2019Nov/0003.html
16:21:18 <ivan> Regrets+ luc, bigbluehat, rdeltour
16:29:32 <laurent> laurent has joined #pwg
16:50:52 <mateus> mateus has joined #pwg
16:54:31 <mgarrish> mgarrish has joined #pwg
16:57:02 <tzviya> present+
16:57:33 <ivan> ivan+
16:58:30 <dauwhe> present+
16:59:16 <mateus> present+
16:59:22 <mateus> scribe: mateus
17:00:00 <BenSchroeter> BenSchroeter has joined #pwg
17:00:10 <BenSchroeter> present+
17:00:35 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has joined #pwg
17:01:14 <mgarrish> present+
17:01:18 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #pwg
17:01:30 <dkaplan3> present+
17:01:59 <marisa> marisa has joined #pwg
17:02:03 <wendyreid> present+
17:02:07 <marisa> marisa has joined #pwg
17:02:16 <rkwright> rkwright has joined #pwg
17:02:27 <rkwright> present+
17:02:31 <mateus> wendyreid: let's get started!
17:02:36 <marisa> present+
17:02:41 <laurent> laurent has joined #pwg
17:02:41 <wendyreid> https://www.w3.org/publishing/groups/publ-wg/Meetings/Minutes/2019/2019-11-04-pwg
17:02:51 <laurent> present+
17:02:53 <mateus> ... approving minutes...
17:03:01 <ivan> resolved: last week's minutes accepted
17:03:06 <Avneesh> present+
17:03:06 <mateus> ... minutes approved!
17:03:19 <mateus> ... plan for today is to talk about getting to CR
17:03:24 <wendyreid> https://github.com/w3c/publ-wg/wiki/%5BPublishing-WG%5D-CR-Transition-for-pub-manifest-and-audiobooks
17:03:34 <mateus> ... posting a link... first major thing is the transition document that we are currently working on
17:03:38 <ivan> Topic: Road to CR
17:03:47 <mateus> ... major part we need to discuss and finalize is our test plan
17:04:05 <mateus> ... need not necessarily hard tests, but clear strategies for how audiobooks and pub manifest documents will be tested
17:04:09 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
17:04:17 <gpellegrino> present+
17:04:31 <Bill_Kasdorf> Bill_Kasdorf has joined #pwg
17:04:32 <mateus> ... we should finalize the text we have here, hoping we get people to help with the task of writing tests and finalizing before the end of the year
17:04:38 <mateus> ... ivan, anything missing?
17:04:45 <Bill_Kasdorf> present+
17:05:00 <George> George has joined #pwg
17:05:05 <mateus> ivan: one more thing... not just what to test and how, but how we ourselves will produce reports for the testing...
17:05:18 <mateus> ... can't produce purely manually... there are ways to speed it up and automatize it
17:05:25 <George> present+ George
17:05:25 <mateus> ... but depends very much on what we test and how
17:05:34 <mateus> ... not something to decide today, but something to think about
17:05:45 <franco> franco has joined #pwg
17:05:48 <franco> present+
17:05:56 <mateus> wendyreid: i don't see Tim Cole here today, but he was very kind to show what Web Annotations did for testing
17:06:18 <mateus> ... we can use the structure from Web Platform tests... it also provides a visual way to prove how well testing is going
17:06:33 <mateus> ... might be our best option, might just need to make that clear in the transition document
17:06:43 <mateus> ... we could also produce a test suite people can reference
17:06:54 <tzviya> q+
17:06:55 <wendyreid> q?
17:07:00 <mateus> ... i think that's the best way
17:07:03 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
17:07:13 <Bill_Kasdorf> Yay, Tzviya!!!
17:07:43 <josh> josh has joined #pwg
17:07:54 <ivan> q+
17:07:57 <LarsColibrio> LarsColibrio has joined #pwg
17:07:57 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:08:00 <josh> present+
17:08:03 <mateus> tzviya: i don't see Lars... who has implemented audiobooks in his reading system (Colibrio)... and he said he can help... so that can be a part of the plan... with Tim and Lars working on automated testing, we have a solid team
17:08:20 <ivan> https://github.com/iherman/PubManifest/tree/master/tests
17:08:22 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #pwg
17:08:29 <CharlesL> present+
17:08:42 <mateus> ivan: one other thing that may be helpful... i did an implementation of the pub manifest algorithm and collected a number of tests (linked) which are all small manifests that could be a good start with that specific part of the testing
17:08:53 <mateus> ... have organized it in completely ad hoc manner for myself, but that can be changed
17:09:29 <mateus> wendyreid: just noticed that LarsColibrio joined... do you want to say hi?
17:09:44 <mateus> ... seems like you're muted
17:10:05 <mateus> LarsColibrio: hello everyone [some garbled audio in background]
17:10:43 <dauwhe> q+
17:10:48 <wendyreid> ack dauwhe
17:10:50 <mateus> wendyreid: LarsColibrio is here... have already spoken to him about testing... also gotten word of another implementer who is interested and who will want to test, too
17:10:57 <George> q+
17:11:01 <wendyreid> ack George
17:11:02 <tzviya> guest+ Lars_Wallin
17:11:33 <dauwhe> dauwhe: how do we know that these sorts of tests pass?
17:12:03 <mateus> George: what is the relationship between these tests and an architecture that would make it easy to move this forward?
17:12:24 <ivan> q+
17:12:24 <LarsColibrio> Good idea George, I would say that you will get this for free basically
17:13:03 <dauwhe> q+
17:13:14 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:13:19 <wendyreid> ack dauwhe
17:13:21 <ivan> q+
17:13:21 <mateus> wendyreid: need to cover the statements made in the specification, pass/fail basis... failures can point us to things we may not have realized would be problematic... some other kinds of tests could be written in such a way that they meet the requirements of the spec
17:14:02 <mateus> dauwhe: looking at ivan's tests, they are mostly manifests that exhibit properties of pub manifests, but when i think of html/css tests, it passes if there's a 'green square'.... it's obvious whats passes and fails...
17:14:29 <mateus> ... but i can't tell here... i guess i can point a UA at these manifests and verify that it works, but that is not clear from this json-ld file
17:14:32 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:14:40 <LarsColibrio> I would like to suggest that we use our implementation as base for the testing algorithms
17:15:03 <LarsColibrio> Our code should be a 1:1 implementation with the spec
17:15:14 <dauwhe> q+
17:15:22 <mateus> ivan: to be clear, what i have there grew out of testing my own implementation... and i do not claim to do more than that... i have a separate yaml file, too... there is a description of the tests there, but i don't claim it's more than that... we have to work on it
17:16:12 <mateus> ... to be more generic and answer George's question... the infrastructure and tests are closely related... and that being said, we have to realize that an EPUB checker or audiobook checker will test whether a specific manifest is correct or not... the goal of the CR phase is to test whether the spec is ok or not...
17:16:31 <mateus> ... whether there are no problems with how the spec is formulated, and whether the statements can be implemented in the first place
17:17:10 <wendyreid> ack dauwhe
17:17:12 <mateus> ... it's securing that the spec we produce is okay... in this sense, the implementation i and mattg did, are useful because they revealed inconsistencies in the algorithm
17:17:38 <garth> garth has joined #pwg
17:17:50 <garth> present+ Garth
17:17:55 <mateus> dauwhe: ivan, it's important to make the distinction between the tests we need for CR, about implementation, vs. validating structure like EPUBCheck... that's a cautionary tale of excellent validation that doesn't necessarily correspond to support in user agents
17:18:26 <mateus> ... want to avoid tests depending too much on internal states of user agents... hoping the tests for audiobook are very concrete--"given this manifest, the user experiences the following"
17:19:09 <mateus> wendyreid: that's my hope too... one thing for the manifest to be processed, and another thing for the user to experience the audiobook on a consistent basis... don't need to provide a lot of user input for those needs to be met...
17:19:15 <LarsColibrio> What you are discussing now guys are not spec tests ;)
17:19:16 <mateus> ... we tried to make that clear
17:19:25 <tzviya> q+
17:19:39 <LarsColibrio> Spec tests need to be unit oriented
17:19:45 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
17:19:55 <mateus> ... it sounds like we will need to clarify use the webplatform test model and how
17:20:16 <garth> q?
17:20:48 <mateus> tzviya: reading Lars' comments... let's make sure we keep the distinction between spec tests and other tests clear
17:21:07 <mateus> wendyreid: does anyone have experience writing web platform tests that i don't know and have overlooked?
17:21:21 <LarsColibrio> I wish all these people could just leave the room I'm in (an a11y meetup in Stockholm) 😋
17:21:31 <LarsColibrio> https://web-platform-tests.org/
17:21:33 <mateus> George: do you know about ACT (tests for accessibility)... rec for writing tests for accessibility
17:21:57 <LarsColibrio> Checkout the link :)
17:22:01 <mateus> wendyreid: i'll look over those...
17:22:15 <wendyreid> https://www.w3.org/TR/act-rules-format/
17:22:43 <ivan> present+ rachel
17:22:50 <mateus> ... alright, i think we've exhausted this topic... will make some changes to the CR document this week; send me ideas and comments and i can incorporate them as needed
17:23:05 <LarsColibrio> Will do Wendy. I have a bunch of ideas 👍
17:23:14 <garth> q?
17:23:16 <mateus> ... next thing is the matter of shipping LPF concurrently with pub manifest and audiobooks
17:23:19 <ivan> Topic: LPF publish with PM and Audiobooks
17:23:33 <mateus> ... laurent, can you comment on how close LPF is to publishing?
17:23:52 <LarsColibrio> I thought you called it LPP which would be an awesome name 😁
17:24:28 <mateus> laurent: yes, we left the spec almost done, but on the two minor verifications to do, one related to respec warning that i want to work on with ivan... and the other thing is i need to add better links from LPF to web publication and publication manifest specs
17:25:15 <mateus> ... but for the text itself we left it with no new comments... seems good... and would like it to be published as a companion for the audiobook spec, because when we speak to audiobook producers, the first thing they want is a packaging mechanism
17:25:20 <ivan> q+
17:25:25 <mateus> wendyreid: awesome
17:25:25 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:25:38 <mateus> ivan: first, mattg is probably a better expert on respec than me
17:26:01 <tzviya> q+ to ask for lpf refresher
17:26:32 <wendyreid> ack tzviya
17:26:32 <Zakim> tzviya, you wanted to ask for lpf refresher
17:26:33 <mateus> ... the other thing is that we should make it clear that once we have acceptance of director, LPF will need to go through a different path because it has not been published yet... needs to be published by the webmaster with a shortname etc.
17:26:35 <LarsColibrio> We have a LPF implementation as well if that helps
17:26:51 <mateus> tzviya: quick reminder of requirements for LPF... do we require it as the packaging format?
17:26:55 <mateus> wendyreid: no
17:27:02 <laurent> q+
17:27:05 <wendyreid> ack laurent
17:27:22 <mateus> tzviya: remind me what the difference between LPF and [??] is?
17:27:36 <wendyreid> s/[??]/ZIP
17:28:12 <LarsColibrio> The name is sub optimal
17:28:39 <LarsColibrio> Lightweight Publication Packaging would be much more true to its purpose
17:28:58 <dauwhe> scribe+ dauwhe
17:29:22 <dauwhe> ivan: we need a formal vote about the fact we want to publish, and under what name and shortname
17:29:45 <dauwhe> wendyreid: we did our naming battles months ago, and I do not want to revisit those dark times
17:30:23 <wendyreid> Proposed: Publish the Lightweight Packaging Format note with the name Lightweight Packaging Format, and the shortname LPF
17:30:24 <LarsColibrio> Sorry Wendy to be a drag, but LPF is seriously ambiguous. It's kinda in the "global namespace"
17:30:34 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pwg
17:30:38 <LarsColibrio> And it is not a Lightweight Packaging Format
17:30:50 <LarsColibrio> That would imply that you can package anything
17:31:18 <LarsColibrio> Nope
17:31:28 <LarsColibrio> Its only publication.json
17:31:40 <garth> +1 (with note that Audiobooks isn’t too useful without LPF) [and lets not reopen this discussion]
17:31:44 <dauwhe> wendyreid: we did talk about this extensively months ago
17:31:48 <LarsColibrio> if we change the publication.json to manifest.json
17:31:52 <dauwhe> ... the issue have been closed
17:31:52 <LarsColibrio> 😁
17:31:54 <LarsColibrio> LPP
17:32:01 <dkaplan3> +1, and we shouldn't reopen.
17:32:07 <ivan> +1
17:32:09 <laurent> +1
17:32:13 <gpellegrino> 0
17:32:14 <mgarrish> 0
17:32:14 <tzviya> +1 (agree not to reopen)
17:32:14 <marisa> 0
17:32:15 <wendyreid> +1
17:32:18 <LarsColibrio> -1
17:32:18 <dkaplan3> Reminder that the perfect is the enemy of the good
17:32:29 <dauwhe> 0
17:32:31 <rkwright> 0
17:32:38 <Rachel> 0
17:32:43 <Bill_Kasdorf> 0
17:32:46 <dauwhe> q+
17:32:47 <BenSchroeter> 0
17:32:48 <josh> 0
17:32:50 <LarsColibrio> But i'm not in the WG so 😋
17:32:51 <wendyreid> ack dauwhe
17:33:16 <dkaplan3> q+
17:33:20 <ivan> q+
17:33:24 <rkwright> q+
17:33:30 <wendyreid> ack dkaplan
17:33:39 <dauwhe> dkaplan3: that's a lot of zeros; we're short a lot of people
17:33:41 <mgarrish> q+
17:33:46 <dauwhe> ... maybe we should reopen by email
17:34:14 <dauwhe> ... but I want to remind old-timers that we have a pattern of bikeshedding things for months, and then revisiting
17:34:26 <dauwhe> ... I would encourage people to not block things that are not blockers
17:34:38 <dauwhe> ... if there were good easy answers, we would have found them
17:34:53 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:34:57 <dauwhe> ... just remember why we are negative about bikeshedding
17:35:11 <dauwhe> ivan: I agree with Dave, perhaps doing this by email
17:35:26 <dauwhe> ... there's a rule that any resolution can be revisited within 5 days
17:35:46 <dauwhe> ... so we could resolve today and ask for objections/comments via email, and know before the next meeing
17:35:53 <dauwhe> dauwhe: works for me
17:35:57 <LarsColibrio> 👍
17:36:05 <garth> q?
17:36:06 <wendyreid> ack rkwright
17:36:11 <dauwhe> rkwright: Deborah and Ivan stated my case
17:36:24 <laurent> q+
17:36:28 <dauwhe> ... I'm uncomfortable both with the reduced attendance due to holiday, and lots of 0s
17:36:31 <wendyreid> ack mg
17:36:38 <dauwhe> mgarrish: I don't want to bikeshed again
17:36:56 <LarsColibrio> +1 mat
17:37:02 <dauwhe> ... if we said why we're calling it lightweight, that would be better, but we don't explain
17:37:02 <wendyreid> ack laurent
17:37:09 <LarsColibrio> Should have been +1 Matt
17:37:26 <garth> q?
17:37:28 <dauwhe> laurent: there are many zeros, and it would be good to have comments from those explaining why
17:37:35 <dauwhe> ... what are people not sure about
17:37:54 <garth> q+
17:37:55 <Bill_Kasdorf> for me it's the lack of the word "publication." Publication Packaging Format would be clearer.
17:38:07 <dauwhe> wendyreid: I'll send an email explaining the issues to vote on, and I would ask 0 and -1s provide short explanations of why they are voting that way
17:38:14 <josh> q+
17:38:15 <garth> q?
17:38:17 <dauwhe> ... is it a problem with the name, etc.?
17:38:18 <wendyreid> ack garth
17:38:20 <LarsColibrio> Lightweight Publication Packaging is good guys
17:38:25 <dauwhe> garth: I was gonna comment, I was a plus 1
17:38:32 <dauwhe> ... I thought that vote was just on the name
17:38:52 <wendyreid> ack josh
17:39:18 <dauwhe> josh: I don't necessarily like taking a vote on armistice day/veteran's day
17:39:19 <ivan> present+ josh
17:39:31 <dauwhe> ... I don't like having to explain a zero... for me it's "I don't care"
17:39:45 <dauwhe> ... I'm abstaining because I'm deferring to the better judgment of others
17:39:59 <dauwhe> wendyreid: that's fine, that's an OK thing to say
17:40:13 <dauwhe> ... I just want to make sure we have all the info out there. Consensus is good. I want to know.
17:40:28 <dauwhe> everyone: we're ok with being ok about being ok
17:40:29 <ivan> Topic: Move to CR
17:40:33 <ivan> q+
17:40:37 <wendyreid> ack ivan
17:41:03 <dauwhe> ivan: what I would propose to do... we don't have anything more to change on the doc
17:41:25 <dauwhe> ... let's make it clear, in the email that you will send out, in a week from now we plan to make a vote on CR
17:41:35 <dauwhe> ... people should look at the docs, as they are now final
17:41:46 <dauwhe> ... we can publish as /TR/ WD
17:42:04 <dauwhe> ... people should look at the docs and the wiki, and prepare properly for a vote next week
17:42:42 <dauwhe> wendyreid: I'll send an email outlining everything we have to vote on
17:42:56 <dauwhe> ... and respond to the email with any concerns you have
17:43:04 <dauwhe> ... or you can even just contact the chairs
17:43:08 <dauwhe> ... or log issues in github
17:43:20 <dauwhe> ... let's get to CR!
17:43:22 <LarsColibrio> Yay 🚀
17:43:39 <dauwhe> wendyreid: is there any other business?
17:43:40 <LarsColibrio> Good work!
17:43:52 <Bill_Kasdorf> yes to baby pictures
17:46:14 <dkaplan3> dkaplan3 has left #pwg
17:46:18 <CharlesL> CharlesL has left #pwg
17:50:17 <LarsColibrio>  lars@colibrio.com
17:50:39 <LarsColibrio> https://demo.colibrio.com/?publication_url=https://s3.eu-north-1.amazonaws.com/catalog.colibrio.com/flatland_with_toc.lpf
17:57:19 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
17:57:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/11/11-pwg-minutes.html ivan
17:57:19 <ivan> zakim, bye
17:57:19 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
17:57:19 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
17:57:19 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been tzviya, dauwhe, mateus, BenSchroeter, mgarrish, dkaplan, wendyreid, rkwright, marisa, laurent, Avneesh, gpellegrino,
17:57:19 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pwg