W3C

– DRAFT –
(MEETING TITLE)

05 February 2021

Attendees

Present
AlexGrover, avneeshsingh, CharlesL, George, gpellegrino, laurent_, MadeleineRothberg
Regrets
-
Chair
avneeshsingh
Scribe
gpellegrino

Meeting minutes

<avneeshsingh> https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85396591844?pwd=dVROUFRSMjVpZkNvS2RBayszcFltQT09

<avneeshsingh> https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/principles/

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/32

removing specific mentions to formats in the principles

we should make more generic "EPUB" and "ONIX" in the principles document

George: may we have "accessibility metadata" instead of only "metadata"?

<George> +1

<laurent_> +1

avneeshsingh: do we approve it?

+1

<avneeshsingh> approved #32 with modification of accessibility metadata instead of metadata

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/28

<avneeshsingh> https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/principles/#ui-technical-details

avneeshsingh: this problem mainly address accessibility metadata, not generic metadata
… so section 3 is more for examples

MadeleineRothberg_: I think the issue is it ok to have "audiobook" in the front, instead that inside the "metadata" section?

gpellegrino: I think that it is only an example
… so we can clarify it

<avneeshsingh> proposal: provide a clarification that this is an example

<MadeleineRothberg_> +1

+1

<George> +1+1

<mgarrish> 0

<avneeshsingh> resolved

<laurent_> 0

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/33

avneeshsingh: right now conformance URL points to IDPF
… since we are updating the URLs, why don't we update it?
… the fact is that we will publish that document in 2022

mgarrish: actually they do not point to pages, but they are URIs
… so we can change the note from "they point to an IDPF page" to "they point to an IDPF URIs"

avneeshsingh: Matt, can you add it to the issue tracker?

Resolution: agreed with approach mentioned in issue tracker, and Matt will do minor improvements

gpellegrino: may we not close the issue and tag it for the next version?

avneeshsingh: good

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/30

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/29

avneeshsingh: these two are straight forward

<avneeshsingh> Proposal: approve #30, #29

+1

<MadeleineRothberg_> +1

+2

<avneeshsingh> resolved

<George> +2

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/issues/34

<avneeshsingh> https://github.com/edrlab/thorium-reader/issues/1332#issuecomment-763486512

avneeshsingh: the next issue it is only for techniques, so it is not compulsory to solve it now

avneeshsingh: the basic question is: is an audiobook a publication of only audio? Or also a Media Overlay EPUB is an audiobook?

charles: for me if it has audio it is an audiobook

laurent_: I agree with Charles, but from a user point of view the user interface to access the content is different

George: there are a ot of features that are available in EPUB MO and not in audiobooks (for example searching, highlight), so we have to display the difference

laurent_: maybe we can only change the label "audiobook"

avneeshsingh: I'm concerned that changing the label now, we have to move forward the pubblicatin of the document

<laurent_> I agree with Avneesh

George: do we need something like "multimedia overlay"?

avneeshsingh: right now we have that if access-sufficient = audio, than it is an audiobook

George: I think it is a marketing stuff to describe a publication as purely audio or audio+text

gpellegrino: for only text we have "screenreader friendly", "audiobook" is a type of pubblication, not a way to access the content

mgarrish: is it a metadata problem or is it a wording problem?
… maybe we can say "audio playback" available

<laurent_> Frankly "Audio Playback" would be better than "Audiobook" here

MadeleineRothberg_: I think the problem isn't in the metadata, I think it is more on the label side
… maybe we can use "Full audio available"
… maybe we can use a note, but we can also change the label

George: I think we should add examples about this

avneeshsingh: what is the cost of delaying the publication of 1-2 weeks for changing the label?

<laurent_> Example https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/techniques/epub-metadata.html#example-9.1-all-metadata-fields-present presents what an EPUB 3 with Media Overlays will get

gpellegrino: may we vote?

<avneeshsingh> Proposal: delay publication a little and correct label for audio books

+1

<MadeleineRothberg_> +1

<mgarrish> +1

<laurent_> +1

<CharlesL> +1

<avneeshsingh> resolved

<George> +1

avneeshsingh: Madeleine maybe you are the right person to find a new wording

laurent_: we can add an example of metadata for EPUB MO as shown here: https://w3c.github.io/publ-a11y/UX-Guide-Metadata/techniques/epub-metadata.html#example-9.1-all-metadata-fields-present
… I will open an issue on this

<MadeleineRothberg_> +1 to full audio

<CharlesL> +1

avneeshsingh: do we want to brainstorm now for the right label for EPUB MOs?

laurent_: what about full audio?

CharlesL: if it has access-mode sufficient textual we will have "screenreader friendly", maybe also having "full text" we'll also be fine

MadeleineRothberg_: for audio it is simpler: we have only one metadata

avneeshsingh: any volunteer?

gpellegrino: me!

<CharlesL> Yes I can help on the EPUB schema techniques

avneeshsingh: any other stuff?

George: what is our timeline?

avneeshsingh: I think in a week we can have the editorial stuff done

CharlesL: are we planning to add a new examples for "full audio"?

George: maybe we should also have "synchronized text-audio"

avneeshsingh: we can do it in the next version

MadeleineRothberg_: we are only suggesting what to put in the UI, we don't have to list all the different possible combinations
… if providers want to say something more or something different, it is fine"

mgarrish: We have the information for EPUB MO in the metadata (not under accessibility metadata)

CharlesL: in our document we have 4.2 section "Audiobook"
… we have to change also the definition

MadeleineRothberg_: Charles you're right, because right now we are only speaking about audiobooks and not about EPUB MOs

avneeshsingh: I think this is a fundamental thing, in this way we don't focus on content type, but on accessibility features

George: are we opening a new category for synchronized audio and text?

avneeshsingh: not right now

avneeshsingh: thank you all!

Summary of resolutions

  1. agreed with approach mentioned in issue tracker, and Matt will do minor improvements
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).

Diagnostics

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: gpellegrino

Maybe present: charles, MadeleineRothberg_, mgarrish