12:49:12 RRSAgent has joined #pmwg 12:49:16 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/06/26-pmwg-irc 12:49:16 RRSAgent, make logs Public 12:49:17 Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group 12:49:37 ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Details 2025-06-26: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2025Jun/0023.html 12:49:38 Chair: wendy 12:49:38 Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco 12:49:38 Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2025Jun/0023.html 12:49:39 regrets+ Gautier, Gregorio 12:58:46 present+ 12:58:55 present+ avneesh 12:58:58 AvneeshSingh has joined #pmwg 12:59:21 present+ George 12:59:31 shiestyle has joined #pmwg 12:59:34 present+ SueNeu 12:59:46 toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg 12:59:47 present+ 12:59:55 present+ 13:00:11 s/present+ avneesh// 13:00:12 MasakazuKitahara has joined #pmwg 13:00:24 present+ 13:00:30 present+ shiestyle 13:00:32 present+ 13:00:34 George has joined #pmwg 13:00:49 wendyreid has joined #pmwg 13:00:56 sue-neu has joined #pmwg 13:00:56 present+ wendyreid 13:00:58 present+ 13:01:00 present+ 13:01:02 duga has joined #pmwg 13:01:10 present+ duga 13:01:31 George has joined #pmwg 13:02:43 CharlesL has joined #pmwg 13:02:46 present+ CharlesL 13:03:47 scribe+ sue-neu 13:03:48 scribe: sue-neu 13:03:59 mgarrish has joined #pmwg 13:04:03 present+ 13:04:09 Topic: PR 2742 - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2742 13:04:19 wendyreid: today we have some PRs that deserve attention 13:04:35 https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2742.html 13:04:36 …the first one is about reserved prefixes 13:05:06 …this fixes a related issue about reserved prefixes and obsoleting some that haven't been used 13:05:42 mgarrish: some of these links go to a 404 13:06:27 …what can we do to help people understand what these are now that there are not relevant 13:06:37 q+ 13:06:45 …we added a new column to the table with more explanation 13:06:47 ack ivan 13:07:06 ivan: how will we be handling this kind of thing? 13:07:21 …the vocabulary is a good example. We didn't take it out 13:07:37 …because of backward compatability 13:08:19 …how long do we want to keep things like this in the specification? 13:09:00 …if we were not dedicated to backward compatibillity we would probably remove things like this 13:09:10 LaurentLM has joined #pmwg 13:09:19 present+ LaurentLM 13:09:25 mgarrish: I think it is kind of silly that we have to retain these things but we have to think of backward compatibility 13:09:41 q+ 13:09:44 ack CharlesL 13:09:52 mgarrish: if we take them out I would love to know who ever implemented these things 13:10:17 CharlesL: does it make sense to delete the ones without a valid link 13:11:01 q+ 13:11:04 mgarrish: if you don't know about these identifiers, it is helpful to add a proper link that we can maintain 13:11:07 ack George 13:11:19 Hadrien has joined #pmwg 13:11:24 present+ 13:11:37 George: Why don't we just get rid of it? If someone is using it then they can complain 13:11:46 q+ 13:11:51 ack ivan 13:11:57 wendyreid: that is compelling for the ones no longer maintained 13:12:28 ivan: the charter says that any 3.1 3.3 document should be backward compatible in 3.4 13:12:42 … then epubcheck might flag these terms as errors 13:13:04 …we will never know if anyone uses these 13:13:30 q+ 13:13:34 mgarrish: we can never be sure it is used 13:13:35 ack duga 13:14:03 duga: alternatively could we say "this is a collection of deprecated prefixes" 13:14:15 …they still exist in the spec, just don't use them 13:14:29 …they are still in epub check and we just never remove them 13:14:48 mgarrish: then we need to decide if we flag all deprecated features 13:14:59 +1 to Bradys suggestion. and bring up a warning in EPUBCheck 13:15:16 wendyreid: it might not be bad if epub check flags deprecated prefixes 13:15:33 q+ 13:15:39 ack ivan 13:15:41 duga: if we really want links we can use internet archive or just let other people look there 13:16:05 q+ 13:16:18 ivan: let's keep it as we have it in the PR, but for our next charter, let ourselves delete some unused stuff 13:16:20 ack duga 13:16:28 q+ 13:16:46 duga: that makes sense, can we track the things we would like to delete? So we can go back to it? 13:17:00 ivan: maybe the deprecated flag would be the best way to do that 13:17:11 ack CharlesL 13:17:17 q+ 13:17:33 ack mgarrish 13:17:35 …then we can add "everything will be retained except deprecated features" in the next charter 13:17:52 q+ 13:17:55 mgarrish: would that suggest we change the PR and put them in the deprecated section? 13:17:58 ack ivan 13:18:40 ivan: to be procedural, we should pass a resolution that deprecated features will be removed in our next charter 13:18:48 Proposed: Deprecated features in EPUB 3.4 will be removed in future versions of the spec. 13:18:55 +1 13:18:57 +1 13:18:58 +1 13:18:59 +1 13:18:59 +1 13:19:01 +1 13:19:01 +1 13:19:06 +1 13:19:07 +1 13:19:12 +1 13:19:24 +1 13:19:29 RESOLVED: Deprecated features in EPUB 3.4 will be removed in future versions of the spec. 13:19:32 q+ 13:19:35 ack Hadrien 13:19:59 hadrien: I have a somewhat long list of things I'd like to see deprecated 13:20:12 …what is the best course of action? 13:20:28 …I did a presentation on the misuse of some properties 13:20:40 …some of it comes from the work of the comics group 13:20:54 ivan: this would be good for the f2f 13:21:22 wendyreid: it would be good to open an issue so people can think about it ahead of time 13:21:42 wendyreid: matt will have to make some edits to that PR 13:22:08 Topic: PR 2735 - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2735 13:22:24 wendyreid: the next is about ITS attributes 13:22:50 ivan: there is a set of attributes that look like the ARIA attributes defined by the W3C for internationalization 13:23:08 …like setting the translation of terms, setting aside language portions 13:23:33 …these attributes are not recognized in epub or an extention to HTML 13:23:55 …i ran into this problem changing a document into Chinese 13:24:12 …it was written with 3 different director sets 13:24:46 …epubcheck rejects this because it is not accepted 13:25:23 mgarrish: we were wondering if it would be easier to add extensions going forward 13:25:44 mgarrish: we would just add another extension section with optional reading system support 13:26:08 wendy: so we want to change this to an extension section? 13:26:20 …any opposition to merging this? 13:26:35 Topic: PR 2731 - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2731 13:26:37 …seeing none, we will move on 13:26:58 wendyreid: formulating the evaluation dates 13:27:25 mgarrish: we didn't formalize a format for the date 13:27:45 …the problem is how to localize the date when we don't know the format of the date 13:28:01 …we could choose an existing format, and likely exclude the time 13:28:10 …and will this affect existing content 13:28:30 …and have we already committed to bumping the conformance number 13:29:00 …if not, this affect all existing content that conforms to the current version 13:29:59 q+ 13:30:15 …are we proceeding on requiring access mode sufficient and is it OK to add this when we bump up the number? 13:30:40 AvneeshSingh: we will discuss this in an upcoming meeting in the WG 13:31:23 …we will elevate it to a must follow and see how the community responds 13:31:45 …we are moving ahead with precautions ACE will flag it 13:31:48 q+ 13:32:10 …I am worried if we make the date a must at this point, we would get downstream errors 13:32:37 mgarrish: maybe we keep a separate list of items that we would return to if we change conformance numbers 13:32:43 ack Hadrien 13:32:45 q+ 13:33:04 Hadrien: I don't see the point of this change as a must statement 13:33:24 …what is the value of this change to the user? When you localize the date 13:33:44 …you can choose what to display. At best this could be a "should" 13:33:58 …especially since there are potential validation problems 13:34:30 mgarrish: I see what you're saying, but at this time we have no suggestion about how to express the date 13:34:47 Hadrien: as long as it is based on an existing format, we can work with it 13:34:49 ack George 13:34:51 q+ 13:35:14 George: identifying the date format seems like standards work 13:35:34 …if we change the conformance number, it gives us more freedom 13:35:40 ack CharlesL 13:36:07 CharlesL: the reading system or bookstore can always dispaly it how they choose 13:36:30 …having a standard format will help it be changed to the local language 13:36:30 q+ 13:36:31 q- 13:36:38 …so we need to go with the ISO 13:36:56 q- 13:37:15 …as far as requiring it, we can start requiring, it has been optional, but we tell everyone to put it in 13:37:34 …we can discuss this in our next WG call 13:37:40 q+ 13:37:54 …I agree with George that we should plan to update the conformance number 13:38:19 ack mgarrish 13:38:43 mgarrish: if we don't make it a requirement we will never really be sure what we get when processing this data 13:38:56 q+ 13:39:09 …if we made it a must we would know we could trust the required date format after a certain point 13:39:25 ack AvneeshSingh 13:39:29 …we don't know what the date will contain if we don't do some testing 13:39:30 q+ 13:39:56 ack CharlesL 13:40:01 AvneeshSingh: does the backward compatibility clause get violated if we make these kinds of changes 13:40:36 ivan: the conformance in the charter never really explicitly refers to the accessiblity metadata, we are in a gray area 13:40:52 …it refers to in practice what epub check checks 13:41:25 CharlesL: similar to "conforms to" if you have that then you must put in "certified by" 13:41:50 …maybe it could be if you include a certified date it should conform to an ISO standard 13:42:10 mgarrish: that is what this change does 13:42:44 wendyreid: This change is OK, but we shouldn't make it a must? 13:43:15 mgarrish: right now we will accept any date format from the date section, make it a "should" and see what happens 13:43:20 q+ 13:43:26 ack CharlesL 13:43:39 q+ 13:44:03 CharlesL: I don't know that we need to include the date/time, but its OK as long as the time is ISO standard 13:44:32 ack Hadrien 13:44:56 Hadrien: One of the reasons we should be looser about the format is we don't know what people have in their systems 13:45:14 …if people use a timezone for instance, we can deal with that 13:45:28 …we shouldn't force things that aren't necessary 13:45:30 +1 to Hadrien 13:45:41 q+ 13:45:45 ack AvneeshSingh 13:45:51 q+ 13:45:56 ack duga 13:46:10 Wendy: any opposition to making this a "should" and adding date/time 13:46:31 AvneeshSingh: let's wait to merge this until after the Accessibility WG 13:46:37 I also agree this should be a MUST 13:46:54 duga: I prefer making it a must and updating the conformance number 13:47:06 q+ 13:47:21 mgarrish: if it isn't a must, ACE can bump it up as a serious error 13:47:27 ack shiestyle 13:47:42 shiestyle: This date is not mandatory, right? 13:48:28 …from a publisher's point of view we generate epub, and we have to change it because the date appeared, many publishers will use this, but this looks like tricky metadata 13:49:12 mgarrish: it isn't required, but it is a good record, for knowing when their accessibility was last done 13:49:20 q+ 13:49:40 mgarrish: the more important part is getting the accessibility review is done 13:50:17 ack CharlesL 13:50:20 wendyreid: if you're running ACE, you'll get an error, but not from EPUB check 13:50:39 CharlesL: does ONYX have a similar field? 13:51:00 https://ns.editeur.org/onix/en/196/91 13:51:25 wendyreid: it is number 91, latest accessiblity asesment date 13:51:48 s/ONYX/ONIX/ 13:52:21 …so we'll let the Accessiblility TF talk about this first, if they are happy, then we can merge it 13:52:31 Topic: PR 2730 - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2730 13:52:59 wendyreid: adding pagebreak source to the metadata vocabulary property 13:53:07 q+ 13:53:12 ack Hadrien 13:53:20 https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2714 13:53:25 Hadrien: a general comment, how useful is this? 13:53:37 q+ 13:53:46 …in practice I don't see how we can use this if we get an identifier we don't know about 13:53:58 …we can't properly display it. It is hard to make use of this 13:54:09 q- 13:54:16 …in ONIX it is pretty coming to know about the other format of a book 13:54:22 q+ 13:54:30 ack CharlesL 13:54:36 …in a EPUB context I'm not sure what to do with this 13:54:45 q+ 13:54:46 q+ 13:54:58 CharlesL: this is useful when the end user is creating references to data 13:55:24 ack wendyreid 13:55:32 …it is more for citing passages by students or scholarly publishing 13:56:02 q+ 13:56:06 wendyreid: it doesn't have to be an ISBN, maybe we can be more specific and suggest a URL 13:56:24 …I see your point about this being difficult to display 13:56:40 …maybe this is also a question for the annotations group 13:56:42 ack mgarrish 13:57:02 mgarrish: the usefulness if for education purposes 13:57:21 …in terms of adding this to the spec. This is trying to address cases 13:57:36 …when a book has no print source 13:57:51 q- 13:58:08 …this is an invitation to make our own standard and no rely on a dc:source 13:58:26 …we can continue working on improving it 13:58:56 wendyreid: is there any opposition to merging this as a step forward? 13:59:04 …alright, cool 13:59:15 …we don't have time for the last one 13:59:39 mgarrish: I'm holding off on this it is bound up in us bumping up the conformance version 14:00:11 …a question of making AccessModeSufficient a must and compatible with the current ISO version 14:00:22 …we may want to wait on this 14:01:08 wendyreid: I will put an "on hold" label on it 14:01:34 move to #pm-ann 14:01:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:01:37 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/06/26-pmwg-minutes.html ivan 14:01:58 CharlesL has left #pmwg 14:02:53 rrsagent, bye 14:02:53 I see no action items