14:50:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pm-ann
14:50:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-pm-ann-irc
14:50:23 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:50:24 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), ivan
14:50:45 <ivan> Chair: laurentlm
14:50:45 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Annotation Task Force Telco
14:51:48 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2025Dec/0020.html
14:51:50 <LaurentLM> present+
14:52:20 <ivan> present+
14:52:33 <ivan> present+ Dale
14:58:48 <duga> present+
15:01:35 <DaleRogers> DaleRogers has joined #pm-ann
15:02:07 <gautierchomel> present+
15:04:07 <ivan> present+ Hadrien
15:04:10 <LaurentLM> The draft spec is at https://w3c.github.io/epub-specs/epub34/annotations/
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> Thanks to Ivan for the editorial cleaning.
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> issue #2835: the creator on an annotation can be a software agent.
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> -> Gautier
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> #2850: Consider multiple values for Annotation tags
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> -> Readwise, Zotero
15:04:11 <LaurentLM> #2851 to 2857 from Ivan, yesterday
15:04:37 <duga> scribe+
15:05:36 <duga> LaurentLM: Looking at spec. There are no issues in the text
15:06:03 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pm-ann
15:06:16 <Hadrien> present+
15:06:28 <duga> ... we do have some open issues in the tracker we need to discuss
15:06:34 <LaurentLM> topc: issue #2835: https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2835
15:06:36 <LaurentLM> s/topc/topic
15:07:18 <duga> ... This is a request to add a software agent as creator of an annotation
15:07:53 <ajellinek> ajellinek has joined #pm-ann
15:08:10 <ajellinek> present+
15:08:13 <duga> gautierchomel: We already discussed with DAISY, there use cases where we might want these displayed as a set
15:08:46 <duga> ... and you may have tools that generate annotations, e.g a tool from ACE
15:09:09 <duga> ... So it would be good show this to the user
15:09:24 <duga> LaurentLM: At the set level we already have an entry for tool
15:09:37 <duga> ... so in this case ACE would be the tool and the creator
15:09:47 <duga> ... Anyone against?
15:09:53 <duga> crickets: no noise
15:10:01 <duga> LaurentLM: Ok, I will add it
15:10:22 <LaurentLM> topic: https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2850
15:10:52 <duga> LaurentLM: This is a request for a list of tags
15:11:27 <duga> ... Readwise specifically asked this
15:11:49 <duga> ... they also want the date the tag was made, but that isn't critical. A simple list would be fine
15:12:10 <duga> ... are there other implementors on the call who are interested?
15:12:27 <Hadrien> q+
15:12:29 <duga> ajellinek: We are interested
15:12:37 <duga> LaurentLM: What do you refer to it as?
15:12:42 <duga> ajellinek: Just tags
15:12:59 <duga> Hadrien: I think if we support tags then we have to support multiple
15:13:16 <duga> ... otherwise we risk ad hoc systems
15:13:33 <duga> LaurentLM: I think we have to support tags, so therefore we need multiple
15:13:56 <duga> ... the group seems to be ok with that
15:14:25 <duga> ... And it yesterday Ivan added several issues, but I haven't had a chance to review them
15:14:46 <ivan> Topic: Vocabularies
15:15:11 <duga> ivan: This is json-ld, so it is by definitoon RDF
15:15:20 <duga> ... so we have to precise and formal
15:15:48 <duga> ... This sounds scary (making it a proper vocabulary), but it isn't so bad
15:16:18 <duga> ... I have a tool that takes a yaml file for the vocab, and it generates a vocab description
15:16:49 <duga> ... I generated an annotation vocabulary uses the current doc and all the terms in it
15:17:13 <duga> ... the classes are pretty good, but the properties are messy
15:17:29 <duga> ... for instance we may need to create sub properties, and a few other things
15:17:57 <duga> ... [demo of generated vocab]
15:18:14 <duga> ... SHows classes, domains, etc
15:18:50 <duga> ... I won't go into the details, but it also makes turtle and json-ld versions
15:19:20 <duga> ... question is how far do we want to go with this?
15:19:34 <duga> ... the problem is some changes constrain the general term
15:20:09 <duga> ... e.g. creator must be less than the original. So you can't really do this in rdf, it is just in the text
15:20:26 <duga> ... we have to decide if we want to go over all the details or not
15:20:52 <duga> ... we also need to decide on how to handle it editorial (separate doc, appendix, etc)
15:21:14 <duga> ... The issues are ones that came up during this process
15:21:23 <duga> ... none are really complicated
15:21:41 <LaurentLM> q+
15:21:44 <duga> ... we can just take them individually, they are independent of the actual work
15:21:59 <LaurentLM> ack HAdrien
15:22:20 <duga> LaurentLM: Ok, that's great! The audience for this will be small
15:22:42 <duga> ... when you say should we be general or go into details
15:22:54 <duga> ... I think we should consider this like a schema
15:23:15 <duga> ... you can't say everything in the schema, we should leave that to the text of the spec
15:23:47 <duga> ivan: Yes, and the the way it works is it makes a link back to the original core spec
15:24:02 <LaurentLM> q?
15:24:03 <duga> ... so it doesn't repeat the text of the core spec
15:24:08 <LaurentLM> ack laurentlm
15:24:33 <duga> ... we really need a second pair of eyes to review the results
15:25:31 <duga> LaurentLM: Should we discuss any of these issues today, or wait for the next call?
15:25:44 <duga> ivan: [looking] there are some editorial things
15:26:00 <duga> ... There is one interesting one
15:26:23 <duga> ... You introduced language and direction as terms, which comes from web annotations
15:26:34 <duga> ... but that was done with an earlier json-ld
15:26:46 <duga> ... but json-ld has added these terms
15:26:55 <duga> ... so I think we should just rely on those
15:27:22 <duga> ... an other one: in annotation set there is an item property. Are these sorted?
15:27:35 <duga> LaurentLM: For EDRlab it is unordered
15:27:49 <duga> ... there is no sequence, the order is meaningless
15:28:08 <duga> ivan: I agree, but it needs to be clarified in the spec
15:28:47 <duga> ... another thing: at the moment, for two classes, the content reference context is a required property. I think that is wrong
15:29:18 <duga> ... there is a serialization section, there should be a reference there to the context that should be used
15:30:10 <duga> LaurentLM: There is an issue whenfor the rdf when there are 2 urls
15:30:16 <duga> ... can we just have 1?
15:30:36 <duga> ivan: It is possible to import a context file, but security people don't like it
15:30:52 <duga> LaurentLM: I am really thinking of the developers
15:31:06 <duga> ivan: The others are mostly editorial
15:31:31 <duga> LaurentLM: ajellinek did you have a chance to look at the spec?
15:31:53 <LaurentLM> topic: Zotero vs the draft
15:32:12 <duga> LaurentLM: Could you provide any insights?
15:32:24 <duga> ajellinek: Our comments are largely techinical
15:32:34 <duga> ... in terms of what we have so far I like it
15:32:54 <duga> ... some uris are tricky in our data model, but those are all solvable
15:33:21 <duga> LaurentLM: So with readwise and zotoro relatively happy, we can probably get to 3 implementations
15:33:57 <duga> ... next in January will be selectors
15:34:17 <duga> ... the question will be which to take from w3c annotation model? And which to add?
15:34:30 <duga> ... and after that, which are mandatory for interop?
15:34:54 <duga> ... if nothing is mandatory we face non overlapping sets of selectors from developers
15:34:57 <ivan> q+
15:35:27 <duga> ivan: Publishing the 2 docs as official w3c docs would be good
15:35:52 <duga> ... we don't need a final version, this just needs to FPWD to help get reactions from others
15:36:07 <duga> ... The current draft seems good for FPWD
15:36:19 <duga> ... so let's do it ASAP
15:36:37 <duga> LaurentLM: We have to decide whether to do it before or after selectors
15:37:03 <duga> ivan: FPWD doesn't have to be implementable, it is just a direction
15:37:24 <duga> ... maybe just put in the fragment selector as an example
15:37:30 <duga> ... that is good enough
15:37:40 <duga> LaurentLM: Then we can do that in January
15:38:27 <duga> ... how do we add these discussions to the issues?
15:38:44 <duga> ivan: it is auto, it will take it from the topic setting
15:39:05 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:39:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/12/18-pm-ann-minutes.html ivan
16:00:24 <ivan> rrsagent, bye
16:00:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items