12:09:40 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pmwg
12:09:44 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/07/23-pmwg-irc
12:09:44 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
12:09:45 <Zakim> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group
12:10:08 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Meeting Details 2026-07-23: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2026Jul/0012.html
12:10:10 <ivan> Chair: wendy, susan
12:10:10 <ivan> Meeting: Publishing Maintenance Working Group Telco
12:10:10 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pm-wg/2026Jul/0012.html
12:51:01 <gautierchomel_> gautierchomel_ has joined #pmwg
12:54:03 <GeorgeK> GeorgeK has joined #pmwg
12:57:00 <GeorgeK> present+
12:57:11 <sueneu> sueneu has joined #pmwg
12:57:18 <sueneu> present+
12:57:52 <Dale> Dale has joined #pmwg
12:58:47 <shiestyle> shiestyle has joined #pmwg
12:59:27 <duga> duga has joined #pmwg
12:59:27 <MasakazuKitahara> MasakazuKitahara has joined #pmwg
12:59:41 <duga> present+
12:59:41 <MasakazuKitahara> present+
12:59:47 <gautierchomel_> present+
12:59:48 <AvneeshSingh> AvneeshSingh has joined #pmwg
12:59:57 <Dale> present+
13:00:03 <shiestyle> present+
13:00:04 <kimberg> kimberg has joined #pmwg
13:00:09 <toshiakikoike> toshiakikoike has joined #pmwg
13:00:14 <toshiakikoike> present+
13:00:15 <kimberg> present+
13:00:32 <wendyreid> present+
13:00:32 <wendyreid> wendyreid has joined #pmwg
13:00:56 <ivan> present+
13:01:13 <ivan> present+ sueneu
13:02:07 <duga> scribe+
13:02:13 <wendyreid> Topic: CFIs
13:02:49 <duga> GeorgeK: Lars talked to me at a meeting telling me how great CFI are and that he has an open source implementation
13:02:58 <ivan> q+
13:03:05 <duga> ... and I am trying to understand the relationship between CFI and EPUB
13:03:19 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:03:27 <duga> ... are CFI in 3.4? Are they referenced by epub? what is thei w3c status
13:03:37 <duga> ivan: The answers are no, no, and no
13:03:57 <duga> ... they are not even a w3c note, and it is not referenced from 3.4
13:04:28 <duga> ... in the EPUB WG, duga and I looked at it, it seems half baked
13:04:38 <duga> ... e.g. there is no processing model
13:04:55 <duga> ... we talked about what to do about it, and at the time we let it alone
13:05:10 <duga> ... we could change our mind now, that is just where we are
13:05:25 <AvneeshSingh> present+
13:05:53 <duga> ... CFI is very bound to xml, so we may be in a better position,  since we previously had html serialization as a posibility
13:06:05 <duga> ... but that has changed, we have decided on xml
13:06:29 <duga> ... I think a discussion with an eye on annotations
13:06:52 <gpellegrino> gpellegrino has joined #pmwg
13:06:55 <duga> ... is a good topic. Let's not discuss now, but in the future we could
13:07:00 <gpellegrino> present+
13:07:34 <duga> wendyreid: Chairs have discussed in relation to annotations
13:07:44 <duga> ... so we likely have more to discuss
13:08:01 <AvneeshSingh> q+
13:08:10 <ivan> q+
13:08:10 <wendyreid> ack AvneeshSingh
13:08:16 <duga> GeorgeK: Given that there is an open source impl, if two epub impls use it, does that count as two?
13:08:40 <duga> AvneeshSingh: Since it isn't in the spec, the 2 implementation threshold doesn't exist
13:09:02 <duga> ... some reading system people are very into CFI. At the same time, some people hate it
13:09:15 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:09:45 <duga> ivan: I agree with AvneeshSingh, but the answer to GeorgeK's question is no, we would need another implementation
13:10:10 <duga> ... but we need a separate full discussion on this topic
13:10:13 <wendyreid> Topic: EPUB 3.4 is now in CR
13:10:16 <wendyreid> https://www.w3.org/TR/epub-34/
13:10:28 <duga> wendyreid: We are in CR! (3.4 that is)
13:10:50 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/epub-tests/contributing
13:10:53 <duga> ... time to talk testing
13:10:55 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/epub-tests/results
13:11:01 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/epub-tests/reports/xx-template.json
13:11:07 <wendyreid> https://w3c.github.io/epub-tests/
13:11:26 <duga> ... the test suite is complete, I believe
13:11:41 <duga> ... we added scrolled layouts, there are mixed layouts recently added
13:11:46 <duga> ... anything else?
13:12:03 <duga> ivan: Not that I know, but if someone would check that it would be helpful
13:12:26 <duga> ... we have 175 tests, inheriting old ones and adding some new ones
13:13:13 <duga> wendyreid: We still have the 3.3 test results. We have some new tests for 3.4, and some of the old tests have changed
13:13:26 <duga> ... it was hard to get all the tests run last time, and now we have even more
13:13:38 <ivan> q+
13:13:41 <gpellegrino> q+
13:13:42 <gautierchomel_> q+
13:13:44 <sueneu> q+
13:13:48 <duga> ... ideally, we would have everyone run all the tests, but if that is too hard what should we ask for
13:14:03 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:14:08 <duga> ... ? Maybe just new tests, or not all platforms, etc
13:14:57 <duga> ivan: There were a number of tests we had to rename, so the old results don't match up
13:15:09 <wendyreid> ak gpellegrino
13:15:11 <wendyreid> ack gpellegrino
13:15:12 <duga> ... We may want to manually update those
13:16:02 <duga> gpellegrino: 3 or 4 years has past since the last test round. I think the testing was very useful for the community, so I think a full run is very useful (regression checking, etc)
13:16:08 <ivan> +1 to gpellegrino
13:16:14 <wendyreid> ack gautierchomel_
13:16:21 <duga> ... We did do some of this at TPAC last time, maybe we can do it again
13:16:30 <sueneu> q-
13:17:10 <duga> gautierchomel_: I agree. I will be testing all the tests on our engines (reader and mobile). Even though these are the same engines, there have been forks
13:17:50 <duga> ... Maybe we can mark the old passing tests that have not been rerun should be marked as outdated (or something)
13:18:11 <ivan> q+
13:18:14 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:18:15 <duga> ... In terms of timing, I plan to test on thorium by dec, is that too late
13:18:51 <duga> ivan: We only have a minimum deadline. We said we will not go to rec until Sept, but we can go later
13:19:23 <duga> ... our charter ends in Feb, so if we get the results in Dec, we can vote in Jan, and go to rec before Feb
13:19:23 <shiestyle> q+
13:19:29 <wendyreid> ack shiestyle
13:19:33 <duga> ... and that leaves a lot of time for others as well
13:20:20 <duga> shiestyle: we plan to test new and modified tests before tpac. If we need all the tests, we will need to discuss. I don't know how long that would take
13:20:33 <duga> q+
13:21:29 <duga> wendyreid: We have reading platforms (ios, android, web, etc), and a rendering engine. We should clarify if the engine is the same, you probably don't need to retest on all platforms
13:21:37 <duga> ... so that might take some pressure off
13:21:41 <wendyreid> ack duga
13:21:45 <wendyreid> scribe+
13:22:21 <wendyreid> duga: I have a question on process, we have EPUB 3.3, it has tests, we have 2 implementations for all of those features, in EPUB 3.4, what do we need to test to get out the door for W3C's requirements?
13:22:25 <ivan> q+
13:22:28 <wendyreid> ... do we only need to test the new features?
13:22:31 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:22:44 <duga> ivan: Formally, we have to do the whole thing
13:22:54 <Hadrien> Hadrien has joined #pmwg
13:22:57 <Hadrien> present+
13:22:59 <Dale> q+
13:23:04 <wendyreid> ack Dale
13:23:08 <duga> ... we could hand wave, but technically this is not a delta spec, so we should do the whole thing
13:23:33 <ivan> q+
13:23:48 <duga> Dale: You mention that a lot of systems use the same engine. My understanding is that on the Mac, everyone uses the same engine
13:23:49 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:24:11 <duga> ivan: The Mac comment isn't correct. On iOS it is, but not on the Mac
13:24:17 <gpellegrino> q+
13:24:37 <duga> ... We never really broke out a matrix like that
13:25:02 <wendyreid> q+
13:25:11 <duga> ... This is not an authority that verifies things - we just believe what the reading system tells us
13:25:55 <duga> ... We do make it clear that if two implementations use the same engine they should not both report success
13:25:56 <gpellegrino> q-
13:26:17 <duga> Dale: Do we not test the reading systems then?
13:26:29 <duga> ivan: No, we can do the test ourselves if we want
13:26:56 <duga> ... last time we thought it was cleaner and more fair if the authors of the RS do it
13:27:02 <sueneu> q+
13:27:10 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
13:27:14 <duga> q+
13:27:45 <duga> wendyreid: We have about 3 layers we need to test
13:28:06 <duga> ... many reading systems use a browser engine underneath, we don't (and really can't) test that
13:28:27 <duga> ... But they still have a rendering engine on top of that which does epub
13:28:34 <duga> ... and then there may be an app layer
13:28:49 <duga> ... So Kobo had a number of platforms, but the engine was shared
13:29:04 <ivan> q+
13:29:27 <wendyreid> ack sueneu
13:29:46 <duga> sueneu: MobileReads has some forums for developers
13:29:55 <duga> ... do we want to reach out to them
13:29:56 <wendyreid> ack duga
13:30:20 <wendyreid> duga: I do not have an answer for Susan, but I wanted to talk about letting implementers do the testing
13:30:28 <wendyreid> ... outsiders may not know how the system works
13:30:40 <wendyreid> ... sideloading may be possible but it may run differently
13:30:57 <sueneu> q+
13:31:00 <wendyreid> ... there's two different pathways, or more, so it's important to have the reading systems provide the information
13:31:27 <wendyreid> ... you also don't know about the engines or quirks, no idea what code may be shared, some may not be, and won't know
13:31:32 <Dale> q+
13:31:40 <wendyreid> ... it's difficult for anyone except the implementor
13:31:43 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:32:12 <duga> ivan: Two more things - still on the matter of the same engine on different platforms
13:32:50 <duga> ... So we added the ability for the same company to report multiple platforms results (android, ios, web, etc)
13:33:26 <duga> ... and the report shows the individual platforms (e.g. 3) and also a single report that shows the `or` of the reports
13:34:17 <duga> ... and also we generate the OPDS for the entire test suite
13:34:39 <duga> ... which could help any reading system that supports that
13:34:57 <duga> Hadrien: Yes, very useful here, and widely implemented
13:35:42 <duga> ivan: and my answer to sueneu is, where anywhere we have possible help, adding to tests is the best thing they could do to help
13:35:52 <wendyreid> ack sueneu
13:36:23 <wendyreid> q+
13:36:26 <duga> sueneu: Thanks, that makes sense. On the other side of things, most of our books go to Kindle
13:36:36 <Hadrien> q+
13:36:36 <duga> ... is it possible for someone else to do that?
13:36:39 <gpellegrino> q+
13:36:51 <duga> ivan: We have failed over 10 years to get them on the group
13:37:06 <wendyreid> q-
13:37:13 <wendyreid> ack Dale
13:37:18 <duga> ... I would take just about any results for Kindle
13:37:49 <AvneeshSingh> Is Kindle considered as EPUB 3 implementation formally?
13:38:07 <duga> Dale: There is a question about what is behind the scenes vs what is available to users
13:38:10 <ivan> q+
13:38:20 <duga> ... I would think we want to test what people can actually see
13:39:15 <wendyreid> duga: It's not hidden behind a wall, there are certain publishers that can do certain things, like fixed layout, there are rules about FXL, only certain pathways are enabled for certain pipelines
13:39:46 <wendyreid> ... different entities might experience different pipeline, readers don't really see the differences in the end experience
13:40:06 <ivan> ack ivan
13:40:20 <duga> ivan: We also have to understand, we are testing the spec, not implementation
13:41:02 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
13:41:05 <duga> ... s So we care whether the spec can be implemented. So we don't care whether it is visible to end users, from a w3c CR process, it just matters that it can be dome
13:42:00 <duga> Hadrien: Back to Kindle, we know they don't work with epub directly. I think that isn't really a problem, and a lot of apps also do the same thing, even though they are cosidered epub reading systems
13:43:07 <ivan> q+
13:43:10 <duga> ... Also, I am collecting requirements for comics stuff. It turns out that if Amazon requires something, a lot of books follow that for all books
13:43:18 <duga> ... they have an outsize influence
13:43:19 <duga> q+
13:44:06 <wendyreid> ack gpellegrino
13:44:10 <duga> ... We could set up testing for Kindle easily, and since we won't get the tests from Amazon, I think it would be interesting
13:44:37 <duga> gpellegrino: I agree with Hadrien regarding epub as b2b
13:45:27 <sueneu> q+
13:45:27 <duga> ... There are often lots of changes made to epub for each platform. For instance, kindle uses mathjax for mathml
13:45:29 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:45:37 <duga> ... so sideloading may give different results
13:45:51 <wendyreid> q+
13:45:55 <Hadrien> q+
13:46:22 <duga> ivan: The reason I would be unhappy to do it ourselves is that it is ideal to have the implementor do it. But since Amazon won't we will have to settle for second best
13:46:26 <duga> q-
13:46:41 <wendyreid> ack sueneu
13:46:54 <duga> ... I am unhappy we have to do it, but that is where we are
13:47:11 <wendyreid> ack wendyreid
13:47:19 <duga> sueneu: Amazon doesn't like side loading for testing, they prefer an emulator they provide
13:48:49 <duga> wendyreid: One other reason we stongly prefer platforms do the testing - in the case that side loading doesn't work the same way as other ingestion methods, we might make it look like there is a bug or missing feature in the platform
13:49:31 <duga> ... so reading system testing is best, but we take what we can get
13:49:46 <duga> ... But even just ingesting all the books would be good
13:49:56 <wendyreid> ack Hadrien
13:49:58 <duga> ... and if they are visible we can test them
13:50:15 <ivan> q+ to askpracticalities
13:51:18 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:51:19 <Zakim> ivan, you wanted to askpracticalities
13:51:24 <duga> Hadrien: Back to what Ivan said, there is more than just the spec testing, Amazon has other requirements that are being implemented by authors
13:52:00 <sueneu> q+
13:52:12 <gautierchomel_> q+
13:52:18 <duga> ivan: At the moment the results are the old results. I propose that we remove those results, so the tables would all be empty
13:52:22 <wendyreid> ack sueneu
13:52:28 <duga> ... old results will still be archived. Objections?
13:52:44 <duga> sueneu: Makes sense, just so long as there is a link somewhere to see the old results
13:52:58 <wendyreid> ack gautierchomel_
13:53:06 <duga> ivan: Ok, it is there, but there is no link. But I could add a link for old tests
13:53:09 <duga> sueneu: That works
13:53:35 <ivan> q+
13:53:58 <duga> gautierchomel_: Do we have a field to say who ran the test? For instance, was the tester from the same org as the reading system
13:54:33 <duga> ivan: So we can add it, but what do we do with that data? I don't think we should say who ran the test
13:54:45 <duga> ... I am not sure if we should display a name
13:54:47 <duga> q+
13:54:55 <gautierchomel_> q+
13:55:00 <wendyreid> ack ivan
13:55:02 <duga> wendyreid: we don't need to show it, but we could store it
13:55:04 <wendyreid> ack duga
13:55:44 <wendyreid> duga: It seems like we could just simply say "is representative of company" boolean? We just need to know platform a's tests were done by someone else, platform b was done by an employee
13:55:48 <wendyreid> ack gautierchomel_
13:56:11 <duga> gautierchomel_: Agree with duga.
13:56:40 <duga> ivan: Should I add a flag that is official test or not?
13:56:49 <duga> wendyreid: Something like that
13:56:56 <duga> ivan: I will do a PR, we can discuss there
13:57:05 <wendyreid> Topic: AOB
13:57:06 <wendyreid> https://www.w3.org/news-events/tpac/2026/registration/
13:57:19 <duga> wendyreid: reminder - tpac registration
13:58:00 <duga> ... early bird ends soon. Invited expert don't pay, and there are fee waivers if needed
13:58:27 <duga> ... Also, some people have vacations coming up - should we reduce meeting cadence?
13:59:28 <sueneu> q+
13:59:32 <wendyreid> ack sueneu
13:59:44 <duga> sueneu: Can we do this in slack?
14:00:12 <duga> wendyreid: maybe I will do a poll
14:00:56 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:00:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/07/23-pmwg-minutes.html ivan
16:20:36 <Zakim> Zakim has left #pmwg