13:06:58 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pmwg
13:07:03 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/12/11-pmwg-irc
13:07:03 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:07:04 <Zakim> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group
13:07:20 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Details 2025-12-11: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2025Dec/0012.html
13:07:21 <ivan> Chair: wendy
13:07:21 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco
13:07:21 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2025Dec/0012.html
13:07:22 <ivan> regrets+ laurentlm, gautierchomel
13:52:07 <DaleRogers> DaleRogers has joined #pmwg
13:55:22 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pmwg
13:56:38 <mgarrish> mgarrish has joined #pmwg
13:58:14 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #pmwg
13:59:08 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg
13:59:20 <toshiakikoike> present+
13:59:28 <MasakazuKitahara> present+
13:59:54 <shiestyle> present+
14:00:03 <wendyreid> present+
14:00:55 <ivan> present+
14:01:03 <duga> duga has joined #pmwg
14:01:22 <ivan> present+ avneeshsingh
14:01:32 <ivan> present+ brady
14:01:34 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pmwg
14:01:40 <ivan> present+ gpellegrino
14:01:43 <AvneeshSingh> AvneeshSingh has joined #pmwg
14:01:50 <gpellegrino> present+
14:01:55 <AvneeshSingh> present+
14:02:19 <DaleRogers> present+
14:03:07 <ivan> present+ mgarrish
14:03:58 <ivan> q+
14:04:12 <duga> present+\
14:04:16 <duga> present+
14:04:20 <SueNeu> SueNeu has joined #pmwg
14:04:34 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:05:03 <rdeltour> rdeltour has joined #pmwg
14:05:10 <rdeltour> present+
14:05:34 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pmwg
14:05:38 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #pmwg
14:05:43 <Hadrien> present+
14:05:48 <CharlesL> present+
14:06:44 <ivan> present+ SueNeu
14:07:14 <duga> scribe+
14:07:31 <SueNeu> present+
14:07:38 <wendyreid> Topic: Deprecate properties - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2841
14:08:07 <ivan> q+
14:08:19 <duga> wendyreid: This is to deprecate rendition orientation and the spine overrides, flow, and spread
14:08:31 <mgarrish> q+
14:08:36 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:08:38 <duga> ... in the case of spread there is some concern for the spine level overrides
14:08:49 <mgarrish> q-
14:09:14 <duga> ivan: let us be precise - we would declare these as obsolete but not conformant, not deprecated.
14:09:26 <duga> ... this will reduce the message level from epubcheck
14:09:56 <duga> ... we have heard from toshiakikoike that this is used widely in Japan and deprecating would be bad
14:09:59 <shiestyle> q+
14:10:04 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:10:12 <duga> ... so we should just say that these won't be used
14:10:14 <rdeltour> q+
14:10:32 <duga> shiestyle: yes, if these are marked as errors it will be a big problem in Japan
14:10:51 <mgarrish> q+
14:10:55 <wendyreid> ack rdeltour
14:10:56 <duga> ... so if we deprecate we have to consider epubcheck behavior
14:11:28 <ivan> q+
14:11:31 <SueNeu> q+
14:11:41 <duga> rdeltour: If we want epubcheck to be more aggressive, then we deprecate some values but make the others obsolete
14:11:42 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:12:07 <ivan> q-
14:12:14 <duga> mgarrish: The whole point of obsolete is to mark things as not used or supported, but we don't want to generate errors
14:13:09 <duga> ... The rendition viewport one should be not conforming, [deprecated???]
14:13:24 <ivan> q+
14:13:24 <wendyreid> ack SueNeu
14:13:59 <duga> s/not conforming/deprecated/
14:14:18 <duga> SueNeu: I have been doing fxl for a long time, some are other 10 years old
14:14:19 <duga> q+
14:14:24 <wendyreid> q+
14:14:29 <duga> ... this will be a nightmare for them
14:14:47 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:14:50 <duga> ... I would vote for obsolete over deprecated
14:15:14 <duga> ivan: I think we should make it clear that we meant obsolete
14:15:29 <duga> ... we just should not discuss deprecation
14:15:31 <duga> q-
14:16:06 <duga> ... are we ok putting all these in that category?
14:16:08 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:16:26 <duga> mgarrish: It is actually obsolete but conforming, not "not conforming"
14:16:52 <duga> ivan + mgarrish: some discussion around language for obsolete
14:17:15 <duga> wendyreid: I do agree with SueNeu, we cannot deprecate since we will suddenly get a lot of errors
14:17:45 <duga> ... so we should obsolete these
14:17:50 <ivan> present+ george
14:17:59 <duga> ... we did discuss obsolete with a path to deprecate
14:18:27 <duga> ... we are in consesnus with orientation and flow
14:18:33 <duga> ... spread still has some nuance
14:18:56 <Hadrien> q+
14:19:01 <duga> ... package level makes sense to remove, but there is some question around spine level
14:19:05 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:20:19 <duga> Hadrien: spread settings are harmful, auto is only default, none is problematic
14:20:33 <duga> ... llandscape, like portrait makes no sense
14:20:49 <duga> ... that leaves 'both' which is highly misused
14:21:10 <duga> ... If you build a RS that follows this behavior you get very bad experience
14:21:40 <duga> ... All we need is "this should be side by side" or "this shouldn't be side by side"
14:22:00 <CharlesL1> CharlesL1 has joined #pmwg
14:22:06 <duga> ... we are sending the wrong message by combining all this information one big property
14:22:22 <duga> ... So something like 'center' is better
14:22:48 <duga> ... We obviously don't want to break everything, but addressing these separately is confusing
14:22:52 <kersc> kersc has joined #pmwg
14:23:09 <SueNeu> q+
14:23:19 <wendyreid> ack SueNeu
14:23:25 <duga> wendyreid: even I was incorrectly confating placement, so we should clarify that section
14:23:26 <kersc> present+ George
14:23:35 <duga> SueNeu: I am glad placement will still be there
14:23:54 <duga> ... I hope we test epubcheck with different types of fxl
14:24:03 <shiestyle> q+
14:24:06 <ivan> q+
14:24:16 <ivan> q-
14:24:23 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:24:46 <duga> shiestyle: Regarding spread: none, we do use it in some cases, but it is the same as 'center'
14:25:42 <duga> ... in some cases we say spine spread-none, so it would be bad for these to be errors
14:26:11 <duga> wendyreid: If we make it obsolete, epubcheck will only use INFO, so it won't be an error
14:26:35 <duga> ... at the very least this will be obsolete for now
14:27:05 <duga> ... so there will be a lot more INFO messages, but it shouldn't break toolchains
14:28:13 <wendyreid> PROPOSED: rendition:spread, rendition:flow, and rendition:orientation will be made obsolete in EPUB 3.4 at the package and spine level, in EPUBCheck they will use INFO messages.
14:28:17 <SueNeu> +1
14:28:17 <Hadrien> +1
14:28:18 <ivan> +1
14:28:18 <wendyreid> +1
14:28:19 <shiestyle> +1
14:28:19 <toshiakikoike> +1
14:28:19 <mgarrish> +1
14:28:20 <rdeltour> +1
14:28:20 <duga> +1
14:28:25 <gpellegrino> +1
14:28:25 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
14:28:26 <CharlesL1> +1
14:28:26 <DaleRogers> +1
14:28:35 <wendyreid> RESOLVED: rendition:spread, rendition:flow, and rendition:orientation will be made obsolete in EPUB 3.4 at the package and spine level, in EPUBCheck they will use INFO messages.
14:29:06 <wendyreid> Topic: Reorganized Layout Section - https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/pull/2844
14:29:38 <duga> wendyreid: In working on the reorg PR, some questions have come up about moving some things to the fxl section
14:29:46 <duga> ... like synthetic spreads
14:29:53 <duga> ... mgarrish are there others?
14:30:05 <duga> mgarrish: The biggest one is the one we just resolved
14:30:38 <duga> ... our previous big problem was it being spread over two specs, 3.3 glommed them together
14:30:46 <duga> ... I cleaned that up a lot
14:31:04 <duga> ... and Hadrien's roll is in it, a few other things
14:31:22 <duga> ... some issues like where are spine overrides allowed
14:31:33 <duga> ... not sure if we want to get into that now
14:31:35 <Hadrien> q+
14:32:04 <Hadrien> q-
14:32:16 <duga> ivan: The big question does spreads ever apply to flowing?
14:32:44 <duga> ... strictly speaking today it is allowed, but the should we continue with that? Or reorg the doc to make that better
14:33:24 <duga> mgarrish: I introduced images in spine simply to acknowledge that they are fxl
14:33:32 <duga> ... just to make it clear
14:34:03 <wendyreid> q?
14:34:04 <SueNeu> q+
14:34:11 <duga> ... if those are ok, and if we are ok with spreads and reflow not going together?
14:34:12 <wendyreid> ack SueNeu
14:34:30 <duga> SueNeu: I haven't seen a used case where it makes sense for spreads in reflow
14:34:42 <DaleRogers> q+
14:34:42 <Hadrien> q+
14:34:53 <duga> ... but there is a need for mixed documents that have reflow and hybrid
14:35:17 <wendyreid> ack DaleRogers
14:35:18 <wendyreid> q+
14:35:19 <duga> ... I just want to make sure if we disallow spreads we aren't taking options away from some creators?
14:35:45 <duga> DaleRogers: I want to agree with SueNeu. In the epubs I create, I have mixed fxl/reflow
14:36:17 <duga> ... I am learning that sometimes documents are treated as reflow or fxl as an entire epub
14:36:30 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:36:32 <duga> ... it would be nice to have that capability
14:36:42 <duga> Hadrien: I don't think there is any impact
14:37:36 <SueNeu> q+
14:37:38 <duga> ... the other thing is, no one knows how to implement this
14:37:45 <duga> ... or how we would even test this
14:37:51 <duga> ... and it is unused
14:38:02 <duga> ... and it is hinted that it is for fxl
14:38:11 <duga> ... this just makes sense for clarity
14:38:32 <duga> ... as a top level section I think it causes confusion
14:38:38 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:39:16 <duga> wendyreid: If we move spread placement to fxl, it will be clearer since in practice it only works for fxl
14:39:34 <duga> ... You could use it on a reflow, but it doesn't really make sense
14:40:01 <DaleRogers> q+
14:40:04 <shiestyle> +1 to Wendy
14:40:09 <duga> ... so we should say spread placement is only for fxl documents, whether they are complete epubs or hybrid
14:40:10 <wendyreid> ack SueNeu
14:40:11 <rdeltour> q?
14:40:22 <duga> SueNeu: Thanls, that is helpful.
14:40:23 <rdeltour> q+
14:40:39 <duga> ... I agree now, it is better to focus on fxl
14:40:43 <wendyreid> ack DaleRogers
14:41:06 <duga> DaleRogers: For me it is more semantics. Does document mean an xhtml page or the epub?
14:41:14 <duga> wendyreid: We mean content document
14:41:16 <wendyreid> ack Rom
14:41:20 <wendyreid> ack rdeltour
14:41:38 <duga> rdeltour: Just checking that the PR stays open for a few days, I have some comments
14:41:57 <duga> ... one is about identifying fxl documents
14:42:21 <duga> ... we have some statements that are hard to test
14:42:52 <duga> ... so we say when the creator has this intent, but we can't test intent
14:43:12 <duga> ... if instead, we say a document is fxl BECAUSE it has a viewport (e.g.) then we can test
14:43:30 <duga> mgarrish: It will definitely be open for a while
14:43:42 <duga> ... I need to do a proper clean up
14:43:53 <duga> ... so please comment on the PR
14:44:28 <duga> ivan: we should do a proper resolution before we move on
14:45:04 <wendyreid> PROPOSED: Move the spread placement section into the pre-paginated section of the specification.
14:45:06 <mgarrish> +1
14:45:07 <wendyreid> +1
14:45:09 <shiestyle> +1
14:45:09 <toshiakikoike> +1
14:45:09 <ivan> +1
14:45:10 <rdeltour> +1
14:45:11 <duga> +1
14:45:12 <SueNeu> +1
14:45:12 <DaleRogers> +1
14:45:13 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
14:45:18 <Hadrien> +1
14:45:23 <kersc> +1
14:45:24 <CharlesL1> +1
14:45:29 <wendyreid> RESOLVED: Move the spread placement section into the pre-paginated section of the specification.
14:45:38 <wendyreid> Topic: Naming
14:46:05 <duga> wendyreid: Hadrien started this as a side comment, but it is worth discussing
14:46:25 <duga> ... we have always called it pre-paginated, but everyone calls it fixed layout
14:46:52 <duga> ... Fortunately I have never seen that in the property itself
14:47:15 <ivan> q+
14:47:15 <mgarrish> q+
14:47:18 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:47:23 <duga> ... should we clarify in the spec that we are discussing fixed layout when we mention pre-paginated
14:47:36 <duga> ivan: Is 'roll' fixed layout or  not?
14:47:37 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:47:51 <duga> mgarrish: This came up in the PR
14:48:14 <duga> ... pre-paginated is the document, fixed layout is the layout
14:48:35 <shiestyle> q+
14:48:40 <SueNeu> q+
14:48:42 <duga> ... that is why I split out fixed layout, so fixed layout can apply to pre-paginated and roll
14:48:43 <wendyreid> q+
14:48:44 <DaleRogers> q+
14:49:30 <duga> ... just from a spec perspective the presentation should be split from the property
14:49:35 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
14:49:54 <wendyreid> ack SueNeu
14:49:54 <duga> shiestyle: 'roll' is for scrolled comics, which will be images, which will be fixed layout
14:50:12 <duga> SueNeu: fixed layout is clearer than pre-paginated
14:50:24 <rdeltour> s/pre-paginated is the document, fixed layout is the layout/fixed-layout is the document, pre-paginated is the layout/
14:50:41 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
14:50:53 <duga> ... all it meant to me was that pre-paginated meant all the page breaks were pre calculated, perhaps with hard page breaks
14:51:18 <duga> wendyreid: the way I look at it, we have reflow and fixed, and within fixed we have pre-paginated and roll
14:51:38 <duga> ... they are both fxl, with the same restrictions (e.g. no font changes)
14:51:54 <duga> ... I don't think we should remove pre-paginated, and it actually makes more sense now
14:52:12 <duga> ... I wonder if we frame it that way
14:52:12 <mgarrish> q+
14:52:24 <SueNeu> wendyreid +1
14:52:28 <wendyreid> ack DaleRogers
14:52:34 <duga> ... so people know at it's core it is fxl with a different presentation
14:52:40 <ivan> +1 to wendy's view of terms
14:53:00 <duga> DaleRogers: There is a difference in the way that book makers and technical people discuss things
14:53:22 <duga> ... in html there is the pre tag, which means this is already formatted don't touch it
14:54:06 <duga> ... is there a way to make technical specs more human centered so we don't have to translate things?
14:54:19 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:54:50 <duga> mgarrish: So we could make a new fixed layout section with pre-paginated and roll together underneath
14:54:57 <SueNeu> mgarrish +1
14:55:06 <Hadrien> q+
14:55:06 <ivan> q+
14:55:07 <duga> wendyreid: Yes, that is exactly what I am thinking, and it makes things clearer
14:55:10 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:55:36 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:55:42 <duga> Hadrien: To go back to the previous resolution, we need to make sure syntehtic spreads are for pre-paginated only
14:55:49 <duga> ... not for roll docs
14:56:32 <duga> ivan: We have to careful about [something] being applied to both types of fxl documents
14:56:41 <shiestyle> Reflow or Fixed: font size changeable or not, Pre-paginated or Roll: spread usable or not
14:56:44 <Hadrien> q+
14:56:53 <duga> mgarrish: Yes, so images in spine will go in the higher level fixed layout section
14:57:19 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:57:39 <duga> Hadrien: Images in spine for fxl will be very common
14:57:53 <duga> ... for roll it may be the only thing that is used
14:58:43 <duga> wendyreid: Homework - think about a better name for obsoloete, and think about using the transcript for scribing
14:59:09 <duga> mgarrish: We can just use outdated for obsolete
14:59:22 <duga> ... which seems just as good
14:59:24 <rdeltour> HTML uses 'obsolete' for both, specifying whether it is conforming or non-conforming
15:00:10 <CharlesL1> CharlesL1 has left #pmwg
15:00:18 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:00:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/12/11-pmwg-minutes.html ivan
15:01:24 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
15:01:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items