Meeting minutes
Update on extending crosswalk of schema.org accessibility metadata and ONIX to MARC.
<AvneeshSingh> https://
Chris: We got some comments from Marrakech group at the June meeting to take them through the crosswalk. to get feedback
… , not a lot of activity or in issue tracker. we have a question for the ONIX experts. offer to share ONIX metadata with us, we would like to map it out, the schema one is fairly clear, but ONIX is a little harder and we need real examples.
C_Carr: most NA authors has not adopted ONIX 3.0
g_pellegrino: I am available to share ONIX examples.
… , Where would you like me to drop these? In ONIX version we have to focus on 3.0, since ONIX 2.0 is not maintained and a11y is really only been added to 3.0. and EU and is used by publishers / supply chains.
<MURATA> The same in JP
GeorgeK: Amazon last year started to require ONIX 3.0 to be delivered to them. this has incentivized to move to 3.0. Not sure where EDU publishers are, but most Trade are moving to 3.0
Naomi_: I have nothing to do with the ONIX systems, our system can provide ONIX 3 happened 3 years ago. a year ago there were some small retailers can only take 2.0. some only could take spreadsheets. in the US the Amazon thing is really making a difference. there are always a few stragglers. I can get a list if thats helpful.
MURATA: I know Japanese publishers has our version of ONIX 3 not sure if all books have ONIX metadata but they are trying but 3.0 is heavily used in Japan.
AvneeshSingh: Gregorio, Madeleine and Charles spent a lot of time getting these into ONIX 3.
Chris: Chris Carr on the Canadian MARC committee in June with the official standards group to pass the mapping at that point to this wider audience to get more feedback / stability before we publish more widely.
AvneeshSingh: related to IFLA?
Chris: American research libraries an implementation of the Marrakesh treaty and get metadata to support it.
<Michelle_> present
AvneeshSingh: Gregorio you will take on the ONIX ..
g_pellegrino: Yes
GeorgeK: are you aware of the ABC?
Chris: Yes, this is more focused on students and faculty to launch a request, this library one direct to get the metadata into catalogs directly so no mediation can be done directly instead of via some 3rd party.
GeorgeK: DAISY we have a WG EPUB in Higher Education, publishers, RS developers, etc. presentations at CSUN, AHG etc. you can join us if you want.
Chris: Thank you, I will mention to Victoria Owen.
Issues raised by AccessibilitySummary guidance document team:
<AvneeshSingh> https://
George: list of issues provided.
<AvneeshSingh> #95: https://
George: Spoke to Rachel and got corrected text for issue and merged it
George: Would like to clarify Gregorio's statement last week that you produce AccessibilitySummary from the ONIX. But if there is a summary in the epub, wouldn't that be carried over?
Gregorio: In LIA, we started certifying before there was schema.org in the epubs. So we have an internal checklist we used to create ONIX metadata. Thousands of ebooks have only ONIX, not Schema.
… From last year we are starting to also create metadata in schema.org so we can use a different workflow, but we are still ONIX centric. So we generate Schema.org from ONIX
… we are working on a solution to automate accessibility metadata for previous books, but it would be derived from ONIX.
George: So these files do not conform to EPUB Accessibility spec because they don't have embedded metadata
Gregorio: Yes, we conform with LIA instead, which can be stated with the conformance statement. So we conform with WCAG for the reading experience but not with the Discovery aspect.
George: should we provide guidance for accessibilitySummary about this workflow?
Avneesh: we should keep the guidance general for summary, not specific to platform
Gregorio: the summary in ONIX is term 00 and the description is Accessibility Summary
George: maybe we should change wording in the guidance doc to "accessibility summary" to be more general rather than accessibiltySummary camel case
Gregorio: switch to description of file, then summary should say... Not if there is metadata, then summary should say....
CharlesL: we were planning to make scripts to look at schema.org metadata to draft the summary, but you are saying we should look at the file
CharlesL: Richard Orme is looking at this issue
Naomi: Given all the different systems and tools, this will be automated in all different ways and this group can't proscribe it
Naomi: we have books that have javascript in them but it is never invoked and there is no interactivity, so if you scan for javascript you will get false positives
Madeleine: did Gregorio mean to scan the books, or did he mean to be more general in the language of the guidance doc to be less tied to one system
Gregorio: I meant to be more general in the guidance document, to avoid tying to one system
Gregorio: So maybe the column header should be "is there mathML" not "is there schema.org accessibilityFeature=mathML"
George: Aim document more at principles and less at metadata
Gregorio: I will update the column headings to be less metadata-focused
George: I think we should also preserve the schema and ONIX values in the table
Naomi: I would appreciate a mapping to hand off to the person who does the ONIX
CharlesL: Could have a column with the generic wording, not call out schema or onix. Or could have a table with all of it.
… extra column in addition to the different metadata columns with the generic information and then what you'd expect in each metadata
… puts the crosswalk right there and also guides the summary
… could separate out tables if this gets too complex
Gregorio: Prefer Charles' second proposal because as we add new standards it will get huge
… maintaining that table becomes the whole cross-walk but that should be a separate thing
Avneesh: Tzviya raised issue that we should prioritize feedback from users
George: We could ask on various mailing lists for feedback
CharlesL: Vendors are starting to follow our advice on how to expose metadata. They have summary front and center and then bury all the details including hazards
… so summary is very important
… do we want to create a survey to send out to ask what would be useful info in the summary?
Lars: authoring guidelines should include writing summary in a clear and predictable manner
George: Yes, that's what we are working on
ChrisOliver: IFLA has just put out a survey to libraries asking about the metadata they are using or would like to include
George: We should find out what users want. Purchasers, professors and school districts that are selecting, different groups
… tailor the survey to these different groups
… Gregorio, when you update the tables, the first column will end up being called what? Features? Information to be communicated?
Gregorio: I'm not a native speaker so maybe George you should suggest a solution
George: Information object, but that isn't good. Information to be communicated
Charles: Facet? Hazards are not features
Avneesh: The purpose is to see what is in the metadata and describe it, so it could be "accessibility metadata" even if not format-specific
George: OK. Column 1, Accessibility Metadata, Column 2, samples of summary language. Then link to crosswalks for schema and ONIX.
… do we put things in there or just link? People would appreciate the essential info and not just the link
… link is canonical but this could be informative
Gregorio: question to Madeleine about crosswalk -- can we organize it with these headings? So that the link will be to the section for that piece of metadata?
Madeleine: we could put in anchors for each row if needed, as long as it is HTML
CharlesL: We would also need back linking to the summary document, wouldn't we?
George: can we put a little bit of info in the summary table?
CharlesL: no, it will be too complex
Gregorio: agreed, too complicated
CharlesL: We can put the link in the first column. Gregorio and I will work this out.
George: not enough time to discuss language issues and multiple summaries.
Naomi: was surprised to hear that Amazon is requiring ONIX 3 -- but that is only for physical books. Amazon still taking only ONIX for ebooks
… correction ONIX 2 for ebooks
George: Action item to follow up with Amazon accessibility contact on ONIX 3 importance
… sub-task force call next week at this time
Avneesh: Thanks to all
Lars: Could use some files to test in our reader