Publishing WG Telco, 2017-07-24 Code of Conduct, Definition of Web Publication

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.

Code of Conduct
Garth and Tzviya addressed concerns raised about tone and volume of comments on GitHub. Passion is great, but let’s remember to maintain professionalism. See and for guidance. Please contact chairs or team contact if you have any concerns.

Definition of WP
There has been a lot of discussion in the WG about origin, manifests, and updating and control of the components of a publication. The group decided to revisit the definition of Web Publication and Packaged Web Publication provided by the DPUB IG. See The group is working on refining a definition on the email list so that we can move forward with issues such as addressing, linking, and origin.

2017-07-17 Telco: Draft and TF Update, Issue Triage

See Minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.

Review of Authoring Tasks
Tzviya Siegman reviewed the outline of the WP draft and sections assigned to individuals. Editors and task force leads are encouraged to start drafting. Matt Garrish posted a skeleton document, available at and in readable form at

Issue Triage
There has been a lot of activity in our GitHub repo, and we tried to resolve some of the sub-issues that arose. The question raised to the group was what is required in the “manifest” of a Web Publication? Garth Conboy proposed:

  • Identifier of WP (required)
  • Identification as a WP (required)
  • List of publication resources. (required)
  • Reading order(required)
  • Metadata (maybe required)
  • Nav doc (optional)

This led to much debate on the call and additional GitHub issues. Please add your thoughts and feedback at

Posted in Activity News | Comments Off on 2017-07-17 Telco: Draft and TF Update, Issue Triage

2017-07-10 Telco: Testing, Web Packaging, Manifest, A11y TF

See Minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.
Shane McCarron of Spec Ops joined us to discuss testing our forthcoming specs. Shane stressed that it’s important to make use of the tools that already exist, such as Web Platform tests. We can also make use of tests that already exist for EPUB, including and the test files for epubcheck. Shane recommends that as we write our specs, we track assertions or testable statements so that we can build a testing strategy.

Web Packaging Update
Garth Conboy and Brady Duga spoke to fellow Googlers about work on Web Packaging. They are happy to work with us, and they plan to split their current work and present formatting and signing to IETF. Several members noted that there are still questions from IETF and Web Apps about the direction of this work.

There has been a lot of discussion on GitHub about manifests. Some threads go into areas that are beyond scope for Manifest. Tim Cole suggested creating separate issues for those items. Dave Cramer will begin drafting some of the manifest spec so that we have something concrete to review.

Accessibility TF
Avneesh Singh sent out a call for participation in the Accessibility TF. Please contact Avneesh if you’d like to participate.

Publishing WG Telco, 2017-06-16: Admin, manifests

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.


This is the first teleconference of the Working Group, following the two days’ F2F meeting in NYC the previous week. The group approved the minutes of those two days (see the for the first day and the Second day.

The group also agreed on a change of the teleconference tools.

Manifest kickoff

The group discussed the upcoming main work for the group, namely defining what is loosely referred to as “manifest”. For the sake of the discussions for the coming period, the group agreed to use the term loosely as a collection of information that is necessary for the purposes of a Web Publication. The group agreed to begin by surveying the PWP Use case documents to collect the minimal amount of information that is minimally necessary without a concern, for now, on the format, serialization, etc., of this set of information. The main guidelines is “The Web works, use it!” (quote from Baldur Bjarnason, as conveyed to the group by Dave Cramer…). This will be the main goal of the upcoming two weeks, i.e., before the next call (next week’s call has been cancelled due to the US 4th of July festivities).

Posted in Activity News | Comments Off on Publishing WG Telco, 2017-06-16: Admin, manifests

DPUB IG Telco, 2017-06-12: Pierre, Working Group, F2F, Async tools

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.


The group started with a sad topic: Pierre Danet has passed away over the week-end. The group remembered him in a few words

He was the involved in the IDPF, and the director of EDR labs, exec at Hachette. Many on this call knew him. It’s sad. Best wishes out to family.

The reason we are here is that Pierre was extremely enthusiastic about W3C. […] we owe quite a bit to him as to what we are doing now.

(See also the obituary on the W3C Blog.)


The Working Group Charter has been approved last Friday, and the Working Group is now operational. Membership for the Interest Group participants is not transferred automatically, everybody (including invited experts) must join that group explicitly. See

The biggest problem with the charter as we put it forward was that the scope section was considered too vague—a mix up of goals and very specific things that we are supposed to deliver. This became a problem for companies that have major patent portfolios. The way it was re-written, we did our best to keep the content the same but make the scope bar much tighter. We extended the charter from 2.5 years to 3 years which gives us more time. That gives us the testing and checking period, which was extended because it would take a lot of work.

F2F Meeting

The meeting is “on”, see the preliminary agenda.

Async working tools for the WG

There was a short discussion on how to ensure async work in the group, i.e., ensure discussion between calls. The group will consider other tools (Slack, discourse, IRC) although the habit of usage GitHub Issues may be the best practice. To be seen.

Note that the WG’s home page is actually served from a GitHub repository, meaning that the corresponding issues’s mechanism can be used for generic discussions.

Note also that there is a discourse channel that is also alive for (digital) publishing.

DPUB IG Telco, 2017-05-22: DPUB Aria and related items, extended descriptions

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.

Charter status

Ivan gave a short overview. The AC review is over, there are 53 answers (which is a high number!). All of the reviews are in favor of starting this Working Group. However, there are three members who require some changes on the charter in view of the IPR issues, i.e., the W3C Patent Policy Commitments; the scope section of the charter has to be refined. This is being done by the W3C staff; plans are that all who voted will have the possibility to look at the renewed text before it is (hopefully) finally adopted. This will take 2-3 more weeks.

Work reports

ARIA related updates

DPUB AAM needs some more testing. There are two implementations, but there is still a need for some more, especially on Windows 10. Some members of this IG may be in position to do those testing. The DPUB ARIA testing is essentially done, a final report has to be generated.

All this means that DPUB ARIA and DPUB AAM may be in Proposed Rec sometimes before vacations, i.e., can be a Recommendation around September. A good way to close the IG…

Cognitive Understanding

There is a task force on personalization semantics in the APA Working Group. Though this work is primarily on vocabularies for cognitive issues, it may be of a more general interest. The approach is similar to the DPUB ARIA work (i.e., an extra ARIA vocabulary). A joint meeting will take place on Wednesday.

Extended Descriptions

The Accessibility task force worked on extended descriptions (e.g., on images). There is an active issue on github and a work by the DAISY Consortium. However, all issues are not yet solved on, e.g., the exact placement for the <details> element within the content without disturbing the visual experience. Eventually, the output will be added to the ARIA authoring practices.

DPUB IG Telco, 2017-05-08: Charter status, F2F planning

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.

The meeting began by welcoming back Tzviya Siegman after her maternity leave. There was a unanimous agreement that her baby is adorable…

Charter status

Ivan Herman gave a short status report on the WG Charter: there 40+ positive votes, and two objections from before. One of the two has already been dealt with, the other is still pending. There are a few days more to go before the poll closes. There is still a good hope that the Working Group can officially be announced at the beginning of June.

F2F meeting

There is now a preliminary agenda for the F2F meeting. Some discussions during the call added new items to the agenda: the importance of testing and, therefore, a discussion on the testing methodology, areas, etc (including a feeling for what the “exit criteria” will be when the time comes), organizational issues (homepage, repositories, scribing, etc.). It has been agreed that a remote participation will be offered for group members if they cannot be there in person.

Personalization discussion

There has been some discussion in past few days, initiated by a group extending ARIA towards personalization, and how that work can be combined with the ideas discussed in this group (eg, manifests). That is a discussion to happen in the upcoming Working Group (personalization is also of a great interest for the publishing work).

Two Interest Group Notes published on Web Publications

The Digital Publishing Interest Group has published two Interest Group Notes, documenting the outcomes of a long standing work exploring the possibilities of Publishing on the Web. The two notes are:

  • Web Publications Use Cases and Requirements collects the use cases and the requirements users and publishers face when publishing documents like electronic books, scholarly journal articles, corporate memos and newsletter, or magazine articles in a digital, Web environment. The document includes 25 different requirements spread over a large number of use cases. The technical considerations related to these requirements are further analyzed in the companion document published also as an Interest Group Note.
  • Web Publications for the Open Web Platform: Vision And Technical Challenges collects a number of technical issues and outlines a number of possible technical approaches to respond to the requirements listed in the companion UCR document. This document introduces Web Publications, a vision for the future of digital publishing based on a fully native representation of documents within the Open Web Platform. Web publications can be packaged and they can be portable. Web publications work online or offline. Web publications can be accessible, linkable, and annotatable.

These two documents serve as inputs, alongside other sources and further deliberations, to a proposed, draft Working Group Charter for a Publishing Working Group.

DPUB IG Telco, 2017-04-24: Charter status, Publication of the final notes

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.

Charter status

At the time of the meeting there were 20 ‘accept’ votes, and 2 formal objections with comments. The FO-s are being commented upon and a new version of the charter is in the pipeline (see the current discussion thread). Hopefully there will be a consensus soon.

As for the 20 votes, it is a nice number but we still miss some of the major players as well as more TPI members.

PWP document title change and publication

One of the issues in the discussion was around the title of the PWP document, which suggested that this document is, in fact, the FPWD for the WP document (this was not the intention). It was agreed that the document will change its title to “Web publication for the open platform: vision and technical challenges” and to publish both that document and the UCR as IG Notes to avoid any misunderstandings.

F2F meeting location

The F2F meeting will be held at: Adobe Systems Incorporated, 1540 Broadway, 17th floor, New York, NY 10036, (see Google map).

DPUB IG Telco, 2017-04-10: Charter status, Latinreq plans

See minutes online for a more detailed record of the discussions.


At the time of the meeting, there were no open issues on the charter. (Note that since the meeting, but before writing this summary, three new issues appeared.) The plan is to get the approval of the W3M management soon (maybe this week) and then the charter may go for an official vote. The timeline is such that the working group can then start at the end of May or early June.


The continuation of latinreq is now part of the charter. The goal is to document the typesetting & typography traditions and rules as they evolved over 2000 years for documents using latin characters. This community things that there is lots of value in this for the Web, too; many aspects of the CSS work reuse (and should reuse in the future) these experiences.

There are lots of work, but it cannot be dependent on one person only, so the Working Group will have to begin by planning and recruiting volunteers to continue and complete this work.