13:04:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pmwg
13:05:01 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/02/05-pmwg-irc
13:05:01 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
13:05:02 <Zakim> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group
13:05:06 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Details 2026-02-05: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2026Feb/0003.html
13:05:07 <ivan> Chair: susan
13:05:07 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco
13:05:07 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2026Feb/0003.html
13:10:08 <ivan> regrets+ avneeshsingh
13:43:41 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pmwg
13:55:03 <mgarrish> mgarrish has joined #pmwg
13:57:04 <DaleRogers> DaleRogers has joined #pmwg
13:58:50 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg
13:59:17 <toshiakikoike> present+
13:59:19 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #pmwg
13:59:25 <SueNeu> SueNeu has joined #pmwg
13:59:36 <SueNeu> present+
13:59:59 <MasakazuKitahara> MasakazuKitahara has joined #pmwg
14:00:01 <shiestyle> present+
14:00:02 <kimberg> kimberg has joined #pmwg
14:00:05 <ivan> present+
14:00:09 <kimberg> present+
14:00:20 <ajellinek> ajellinek has joined #pmwg
14:00:21 <MasakazuKitahara> present+
14:00:21 <mgarrish> present+
14:00:25 <ajellinek> present+
14:00:28 <wendyreid> present+
14:01:09 <gautierchomel_> gautierchomel_ has joined #pmwg
14:01:34 <ivan> present+ dale
14:01:37 <wendyreid> scribe+
14:01:42 <gautierchomel_> present+
14:01:51 <wendyreid> Topic: Image in SMIL
14:01:52 <SueNeu> topic: SMIL in images
14:01:56 <ivan> present+ gman
14:02:00 <gman> gman has joined #pmwg
14:02:10 <wendyreid> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2883
14:02:39 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pmwg
14:02:43 <ivan> present+ hadriengardeur
14:02:43 <Hadrien> present+
14:02:50 <wendyreid> SueNeu: Hadrien, do you want to tell us what is happening in this issue so far?
14:02:59 <ivan> present+ brady
14:03:02 <duga> duga has joined #pmwg
14:03:13 <wendyreid> Hadrien: Just a headsup that I opened another SMIL-related issue, not directly related but of interest
14:03:21 <duga> present+
14:03:28 <wendyreid> ... SMIL for images is something we've discussed, I proposed this as I think it's a missing feature
14:03:34 <gman> present+
14:03:53 <wendyreid> ... we lack the ability to reference an image or fragment of an image and link that to text or audio for that fragment
14:04:01 <wendyreid> ... and role, so we can identify the fragment
14:04:32 <wendyreid> ... I've shared examples, one from Bibliotheque Simon Roland(?), human recorded audio for the captions and speech bubbles of a comic
14:04:48 <wendyreid> ... they had to use the text element, wasn't ideal
14:05:04 <wendyreid> ... because they used text, they couldn't also provide the textual alternative
14:05:06 <ivan> q+
14:05:12 <wendyreid> ... audio equivalent of handwritten text
14:05:39 <wendyreid> ... it demonstrates what Brady might be concerned about, but if its possible today, it may not change things
14:05:52 <duga> q+
14:06:07 <wendyreid> ... if they're doing it already today, it's as a way to  make this work where there's a gap
14:06:12 <wendyreid> ... there is interest from other groups as well
14:06:40 <wendyreid> ... there is a paper published by a French university, where they generated a script for comics using computer vision, genAI, they can generate a description and extract the text
14:06:52 <wendyreid> ... create fragments, they generate text, then audio based on the text
14:07:00 <wendyreid> ... shows what more modern tools can do
14:07:30 <wendyreid> ... not everyone, there's huge interest from DAISY, and there's a technical conference after the DAISY meeting in June
14:07:36 <wendyreid> ... there's interest, but it's currently missing
14:07:51 <wendyreid> ... pointed out one way to do it, adding an existing SMIL feature to our subset
14:08:05 <wendyreid> ... discussion with Ivan, do we put it in the spec and we're not sure if it gets adopted
14:08:19 <wendyreid> ... MO is not well supported across the board, but it could also be a missed opportunity
14:08:32 <wendyreid> ... where there are gaps, people will invent their own formats
14:08:55 <wendyreid> ... we could consider writing a note or just allowing EPUBCheck to not flag it
14:09:08 <SueNeu> ack: ivan
14:09:08 <wendyreid> ... there are many ways to do something about it, doing nothing would be a waste
14:09:12 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:09:26 <SueNeu> q?
14:09:42 <wendyreid> ivan: I will also repeat a bit of what was discussed on the issue, I don't think it is worth spending our time on the technical value and usefulness
14:09:49 <wendyreid> ... as far as I'm concerned, this is a useful feature
14:10:26 <wendyreid> ... that's not a question, in my memory, Brady raised issues that are not necessarily technical problems, but what do we do with a feature that wasn't in the charter, which came in and we have no idea whether big publishers will be interested
14:10:30 <Hadrien> q+
14:10:32 <wendyreid> ... how will it distort the market?
14:10:34 <wendyreid> q+
14:10:40 <wendyreid> ivan:  This is what we need to discuss
14:10:51 <wendyreid> ... it's not about the technical value, it's an easy extension
14:11:04 <wendyreid> ... there's no disagreement there, the bigger question is the "market"
14:11:07 <wendyreid> ack duga
14:11:33 <ivan> present+ charles
14:11:55 <wendyreid> duga: To elaborate more on my concern, we have an existing ecosystem of children's books using SMIL, the way that workflow works is taking an image-only book, add a text layer, get word by work highlighting
14:12:04 <wendyreid> s/work/word/
14:12:15 <wendyreid> duga: If we add this, it's a new flow for generating children's books
14:12:16 <SueNeu> SueNeu has joined #pmwg
14:12:30 <SueNeu> q+
14:12:45 <wendyreid> ... it's true you can make bad content, you can avoid putting text in the divs you're highlighting, there's a lot of features built into the text layer, it works.
14:13:03 <wendyreid> ... we're saying that by making this change you can just do images with attached audio
14:13:27 <wendyreid> ... most of the children's books aren't good for accessibility for other reasons
14:13:39 <ivan> present+ elizabeth
14:13:52 <wendyreid> ... my worry is we're saying you can do either audio or text, and someone comes to the spec and sees two options
14:14:15 <wendyreid> ... an author can come along and see "oh I can do this with images only", but platforms like Play Books won't support that
14:14:45 <wendyreid> ... we should at least be upfront about the new way of doing the books, is that something you want to see in this version
14:15:15 <wendyreid> ... I'm not disagreeing that this is a good feature, but we have a method, and an ecosystem built around that method, there could be an impact
14:15:28 <SueNeu> ack: Hadrien
14:15:32 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:15:58 <wendyreid> Hadrien: Going back to Ivan's question and Brady, we focus way too much on a few players, and the ecosystem is much bigger than just a few companies
14:15:58 <SueNeu> Q?
14:16:02 <SueNeu> q?
14:16:10 <SueNeu> q-
14:16:11 <wendyreid> ... we have orgs moving off DAISY and going to EPUB with MO
14:16:24 <wendyreid> ... reflow files with MO, which isn't even supported in Apple Books.
14:16:52 <wendyreid> ... focusing on just a few players that don't do these things, and missing that there are players that are doing this work, and making these advances
14:17:14 <wendyreid> ... we are seeing passionate users building tools and platforms that support these new things
14:17:38 <wendyreid> ... instead of focusing on big players, should we also support the more specialized libraries, specialized use cases
14:18:12 <SueNeu> scribe+
14:18:12 <SueNeu> wendyreid: We need to start having some discussions about who are we concerned with?
14:18:37 <SueNeu> …there are more niche or smaller players in the EPub market that want advancement of the spec
14:18:39 <mgarrish> q+
14:18:50 <SueNeu> …using web technologies. They do not have the same use cases
14:19:12 <SueNeu> …that we have been focusing on. Because we are primarily focused on larger vendors
14:19:32 <SueNeu> …most of the innovation is coming from smaller platforms and specialized libraries
14:19:58 <SueNeu> …including regional use cases, like web comics
14:20:26 <SueNeu> …we need to look more closely at these smaller players
14:20:43 <SueNeu> …even if we don't expect the bigger players to adopt it quickly
14:21:09 <SueNeu> …if there is a reading system, say in Sweden, that would benefit from this we should do it
14:21:13 <ivan> s/ack wendyreid//
14:21:43 <SueNeu> …to @duga 's point, we do need to reach out and create more best practices around it
14:21:49 <SueNeu> q?
14:21:56 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:21:56 <SueNeu> ack:mgarrish
14:22:09 <shiestyle> ack mgarrish
14:22:27 <wendyreid> mgarrish: It's important to take everyone's concerns, my concern has been expressed by Ivan and Brady, we might be squeezing this in right before CR
14:22:59 <wendyreid> ... yes it's part of SMIL, there's a number of details to work out, it's not that this doesn't have value, but is this the right time
14:23:20 <wendyreid> ... or is this a case where we do this through EPUBCheck and notes, so bigger players have a chance to voice this
14:23:25 <Hadrien> q+
14:23:41 <wendyreid> ... this wasn't in the charter, there was no "notice" of this change, everyone agrees this is good, are we doing it the right way
14:23:45 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
14:23:51 <SueNeu> ack Hadrien
14:24:10 <wendyreid> Hadrien: I'd have to read the charter again, but I think we had accessibility and comics, so this might fit, the work on annotations is bigger than this
14:24:27 <DaleRogers> q+
14:24:33 <wendyreid> ... I'm not advocating to push this in the spec, we can do a note, a future revision, as long as it doesn't get flagged in EPUBCheck
14:24:55 <wendyreid> ... it raises questions about how we handle revisions, we don't know if there will be a charter after this one
14:25:23 <wendyreid> ... the window for doing anything feels narrow, sometimes we know things in advance, and other times we talk to people and learn something
14:25:29 <SueNeu> ack DaleRogers
14:25:30 <ivan> quoting from the charter: "Finally, the Working Group will also incubate issues without necessarily aiming at the creation of final Recommendations during the lifetime of this charter. "
14:25:32 <wendyreid> ... bring those things back to the spec
14:25:43 <mgarrish> q+
14:26:00 <wendyreid> DaleRogers: I'm listening to this and it makes me wonder, what is the purpose of a spec? I guess it goes back to the charter
14:26:25 <ivan> q+
14:26:25 <duga> q+
14:26:28 <wendyreid> ... I take it as we said we'd do this, and we're telling people "this is how you should do it" not that "you must do this"
14:26:29 <SueNeu> q+
14:26:33 <wendyreid> ack mgarrish
14:26:37 <duga> q-
14:27:11 <wendyreid> mgarrish: Don't want to veer too far off course, when we do revisions, we need to be sure up front what we're doing. We should talk to people, but we need to do it more in advance, we need some guardrails
14:27:32 <wendyreid> ... we're already looking at doing horizontal reviews, but now we're looking at a significant change, we need a plan for these things
14:28:03 <wendyreid> ... it's not a critique of bringing this up, just that this always seems to happen and we try to accommodate where we want, but we need some organization in the future
14:28:09 <SueNeu> ack ivan
14:28:56 <wendyreid> ivan: Putting on my staff contact hat, I was looking at the charter, we do these things, but we also incubate things without necessarily committing them to the final version of the rec
14:29:03 <wendyreid> ... we gave ourselves an escape hatch
14:29:38 <wendyreid> ... I would personally, staff contact hat off, I'd be happy to add it with a warning, I agree it's not a major work, not like the layout issue
14:30:10 <wendyreid> ... we can put it in as at risk, it doesn't mean it has to be implemented, we use the remaining year to reach out to learn about the community's reaction to it
14:30:24 <wendyreid> ... if we get positive feedback, we leave it in, if we don't, we can remove it.
14:30:32 <SueNeu> ack SueNeu
14:30:36 <wendyreid> ... that's do-able, we have the ability to roll back
14:31:21 <wendyreid> SueNeu: People see the utility of this, concerns about process, whether this is in scope, the current proposal are to add this to the spec with a warning, removeable if needed, or just add a note and change EPUBCheck to allow this.
14:31:41 <wendyreid> ivan: What I think is to produce a separate note describing this feature
14:31:50 <wendyreid> Hadrien: Correct, a separate document
14:32:02 <SueNeu> q?
14:32:24 <wendyreid> ivan: If the feedback from the community comes out negative, we can remove from the spec and create a note, so it doesn't disappear
14:32:31 <wendyreid> Hadrien: This sounds like a good process to me
14:34:19 <SueNeu> Proposed: We will add SMIL in images to EPUB 3,4 spec as at risk, and then move it to a note if it comes out of the final spec?
14:34:26 <wendyreid> +1
14:34:26 <SueNeu> +1
14:34:27 <Hadrien> +1
14:34:27 <gman> +1
14:34:28 <toshiakikoike> +1
14:34:29 <gautierchomel_> +1
14:34:30 <DaleRogers> +1
14:34:31 <shiestyle> 0
14:34:31 <duga> 0
14:34:33 <MasakazuKitahara> +1
14:34:33 <ivan> +
14:34:34 <ajellinek> +1
14:34:37 <ivan> +1
14:35:07 <SueNeu> Resolved: We will add SMIL in images to EPUB 3,4 spec as at risk, and then move it to a note if it comes out of the final spec
14:35:11 <ivan> q+
14:35:19 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:35:36 <wendyreid> ivan: No good thing goes unpunished, it would be good if you produced the PR to add this into the document
14:35:57 <wendyreid> Hadrien: Each element has its own subsection, so one for images?
14:36:04 <wendyreid> ivan: Yes, and we'll support editorially
14:36:11 <wendyreid> duga: And the RS spec for behaviour
14:36:21 <wendyreid> Hadrien: I'll look it up and figure out where things need to go
14:36:31 <SueNeu> topic: Closing issues
14:36:34 <SueNeu>  https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aopen%20label%3Apropose-closing
14:36:46 <wendyreid> SueNeu: We wanted to discuss some issues to propose closing
14:37:11 <wendyreid> mgarrish: Ivan marked these as propose closing, I just created the link
14:37:34 <SueNeu> https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2879
14:37:36 <ivan> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2879
14:37:37 <wendyreid> SueNeu: One is an issue on the section on encryption files being too brief
14:38:02 <SueNeu> q?
14:38:03 <wendyreid> ... does anyone want to keep this issue open?
14:38:42 <wendyreid> mgarrish: Do we need a recap? Briefly, it was questioned about the XML encryption standard is much bigger, does everything apply or should we provide a subset, I don't think it's critical for us to define something
14:38:48 <ivan> q+
14:39:08 <wendyreid> ... Ivan and I discussed this with the original requester, no one has raised this as an issue. If people are encrypting, it's the vendor and they know what they are doing
14:39:18 <wendyreid> ... I don't think it's worth us wading into
14:39:26 <wendyreid> ack ivan
14:40:00 <wendyreid> ivan: I would even say it more strongly, we don't have the knowledge or experience or contact to relevant communities to comment on encryption, so we should not touch it
14:40:03 <shiestyle> q+
14:40:09 <SueNeu> ack shiestyle
14:40:29 <wendyreid> shiestyle: In Japan, each reading system has its own DRM for encryption, so we shouldn't define anything
14:41:10 <SueNeu> subtopic: https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/2828
14:41:24 <wendyreid> SueNeu: Clarifying multiple renditions, can anyone summarize that one?
14:41:34 <wendyreid> ivan: An evergreen, always there issue
14:42:01 <SueNeu> q?
14:42:04 <wendyreid> ... let's put it this way, we've decided to push it aside as a note, there's been no new evidence that requires us to take another look at it
14:42:05 <gautierchomel_> +1
14:42:30 <gautierchomel_> q+
14:42:33 <wendyreid> mgarrish: We took it out as not implemented, this is a request to pull it back in, but there is no desire to have multiple renditions in this form, we can move on
14:42:40 <SueNeu> ack gautierchomel_
14:43:15 <wendyreid> gautierchomel_: I don't disagree, I did want to mention that the problem of having two contents that are similar and need to be displayed together, the problem is still here, but multiple renditions is not the way
14:43:39 <ivan> q+
14:43:44 <wendyreid> ... educational publishers are trying to do this in strange ways, the documentation doesn't have information on how to handle this case, but it needs to be investigated further
14:44:02 <wendyreid> ... I agree we can close this, but I would like to see a discussion on parallel content being taken seriously
14:44:04 <Hadrien> q+
14:44:08 <SueNeu> ack ivan
14:44:44 <wendyreid> ivan: At this moment, this is typically the kind of issue that should be done as incubation, as part of the CG, it's look at the whole problem again, knowing that multiple rendition didn't work, understanding why, taking a fresh look
14:44:58 <wendyreid> ... it's not something the WG is chartered for, the CG can explore and raise it in a future charter
14:45:02 <SueNeu> ack Hadrien
14:45:06 <wendyreid> ... and I want to see this happen, but we need that incubation
14:45:44 <wendyreid> Hadrien: I agree with Ivan, this needs incubation, I would like to look into it, but I'm lacking in time, I'm already opening issues for fun. I think it's possible with what is in the spec but underused
14:46:10 <wendyreid> ... I don't know how much would need to come from multiple renditions, but it's probably possible to use things that have been previously under-utilized to achieve what we want
14:46:23 <wendyreid> ... it means no addition to the spec, but things that haven't been used or implemented properly
14:46:36 <SueNeu> q+ SueNeu
14:46:40 <wendyreid> ... not sure how to feel about it. Incubation is the right term, even if it doesn't result in normative changes
14:46:49 <shiestyle> ack SueNeu
14:46:52 <gautierchomel_> q+
14:46:54 <wendyreid> SueNeu: This is not the place to look at this issue now, we want to refer it back to the community group
14:47:17 <wendyreid> ... would our next move be to tell the original poster, and ask if they want to present it to the community group
14:47:29 <wendyreid> ... just closing it doesn't reflect our feelings on it
14:47:44 <wendyreid> ivan: The minutes will tell, but we can also add an additional comment on incubation
14:47:48 <wendyreid> ... I can do that before closing
14:47:57 <wendyreid> ack gautierchomel_
14:48:35 <wendyreid> gautierchomel_: I think it's been back and forth between the groups, the reality is that there hasn't been a response, a player will do it themselves, so they don't care about standardization
14:48:48 <wendyreid> ... brings me to the question at the beginning of the meeting, what is possible in the charter
14:49:11 <wendyreid> ... I'm concerned about too many things not being considered, so they do it on their own
14:49:13 <wendyreid> q+
14:49:19 <SueNeu> ack wendyreid
14:49:53 <SueNeu> wendyreid: I am also concerned, we hear about these things
14:50:12 <SueNeu> …the people who need this feature aren't coming to us
14:50:29 <SueNeu> …we would love it if they came to us with a use case, and a problem
14:50:41 <Hadrien> q+
14:50:54 <SueNeu> …we get posts with new ideas, but not use cases
14:51:06 <SueNeu> …we don't want people going off and doing their own thing
14:51:17 <SueNeu> …but we don't always get to hear about what people want to do
14:51:29 <SueNeu> …if people have things they want they can reach out to us anytime
14:51:54 <SueNeu> …we do sometimes rush things at the end because something comes up
14:52:03 <SueNeu> …and we want to be seen as responsive
14:52:13 <SueNeu> ack Hadrien
14:53:09 <wendyreid> Hadrien: We kind of underestimate how intimidating it is to interact with us, not that we are scary, but the idea of influencing a specification inspires fear, and we encourage people and they are nervous
14:53:10 <mgarrish> q+
14:53:16 <wendyreid> ... it's not easy to get feedbaco
14:53:28 <wendyreid> s/feedbaco/feedback/
14:53:48 <ivan> q+
14:53:52 <wendyreid> Hadrien: I keep an eye on things, and I make the case to people, and our efforts have changed minds in the community
14:53:56 <wendyreid> ... it takes a lot of work
14:54:18 <wendyreid> ... maybe we need to do more community outreach, but changing people's minds is difficult
14:54:29 <SueNeu> ack mgarrish
14:54:29 <wendyreid> ... they can't imagine they have the technical capability to change any of this
14:55:36 <wendyreid> mgarrish: There's great value to incubation, we don't spend time on it as much as we should, we should engage more earlier. In IDPF, the most successful extension was FXL, but many of the other specs never went anywhere, if we don't have a foundation before implementing it fails
14:56:13 <wendyreid> ... I think this is why people go off too, it feels like things are set in stone in the standard when we are really open to revision, but we also need to get an idea of what is wanted before we get there is much more helpful
14:56:24 <SueNeu> mgarrish +1
14:56:28 <SueNeu> ack ivan
14:56:34 <wendyreid> ... having implementation before we add to the spec instead of trying to get adoption
14:57:21 <wendyreid> ivan: Along the same lines as Matt, when IDPF merged with W3C, we formed the BG, CG, and WG, the idea that the BG would collect and react on business needs, the CG would incubate, and the WG comes in when the ideas are clear and can be implemented
14:57:55 <wendyreid> ... they can dot the i's and cross the t's. This is what happened with roll, I don't remember when we began to discuss, but it took place over a long time.
14:58:33 <wendyreid> ... the multiple renditions stuff has been whispered about, we have gotten feedback, but we hear "just figure it out" and that's not what we do
14:59:11 <wendyreid> ... we've had many examples of WGs did all the technical work on rough ideas, and the standard then didn't go anywhere, IDPF did the same, that's why we talk about incubation
14:59:22 <gautierchomel_> q+
14:59:33 <gautierchomel_> q-
14:59:49 <gautierchomel_> q+
14:59:54 <wendyreid> SueNeu: Close this issue, start a discussion about process
15:00:02 <SueNeu> ack gautier
15:00:23 <wendyreid> gautierchomel_: Close the issue, and discussion about parallel content needs to be moved to the CG.
15:00:49 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:00:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/05-pmwg-minutes.html ivan