Publishing WG — Affordances’ Task Force Telco — Minutes
See also the Agenda and the IRC Log
Present: Mateus Teixeira, Avneesh Singh, Ivan Herman, jasmine, George Kerscher, Wolfgang Schindler, Katie Haritos-Shea, Tzviya Siegman, Franco Alvarado, Romain Deltour, Matt Garrish, Matt Garrish, Jasmine, Benjamin Young, Hadrien Gardeur, Zheng Xu
Chair: Mateus Teixeira, Jasmine Mulliken
Scribe(s): Tzviya Siegman, Benjamin Young
Mateus Teixeira: https://goo.gl/mTxMDL
Tzviya Siegman: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BEiBAB-RU2FK2_3XZKUERfFi-nGwwFrMFvKe08e0-QQ/edit?usp=sharing
1. overview of our work, identify goals
Mateus Teixeira: overview of our work, identify goals
… Affordances apply to UX that is surfaced to a user in any context
… our goal is to identify the experiences and formalize the requirements and frame them in a technical way
Tzviya Siegman: It is possible that we will kick some work back to the WG to integrate into the spec.
Mateus Teixeira: We hope to have something for F2F in May.
Mateus Teixeira: We need participation from all communities (UAs, users, authors, publishers)
… participation from non-technical people who are familiar with user needs is very helpful
Katie Haritos-Shea: It sounds like we are talking about use cases
Mateus Teixeira: We are talking the WPUB UCR as a starting point, but also the expectations of the user
Katie Haritos-Shea: We are taking the existing use cases?
Mateus Teixeira: We are also looking at how Packaged use cases might differ
… the use cases might not be comprehensive, and we are not sure which can be speced
Tzviya Siegman: DPUB IG published https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp-ucr/
Avneesh Singh: do we need to decide which issues should be provided by UA and which should be provided by WP?
Mateus Teixeira: we discussed this months ago, and we had to wait until manifests and metadata to settle
… for the purpose of this group, I think we should focus on use cases and then make the decision with the whole WG in the context of metadata/manifest
Jasmine Mulliken: Use case document: https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp-ucr/
Ivan Herman: We have to be careful to separate use cases from what is in WP document, which will include a technical description of what we would like to see happen
… example -I would like to be able to search through the whole publication, which can be bound back to several use cases
Mateus Teixeira: Related to ivan’s comment: https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/143
Ivan Herman: the question is what do we have to do for each affordance and what are normative requirements
Avneesh Singh: It would be good to have a template with one or two examples
George Kerscher: so we are specifying UA behavior?
Mateus Teixeira: yes, but we also need to identify what a WP needs to provide in order for that behavior to happen
Ivan Herman: +1 to George
Katie Haritos-Shea: We are talking about the capabilities that have to be available to the publication and the UA has to support?
Mateus Teixeira: Yes
… and we need to identify what we can actually write as a spec. Some of these might be more along the lines of guidelines and best practices.
Benjamin Young: example of affordances: HTML affords hypermedia (links & forms) and the browser provides the features needed to interact with them
Mateus Teixeira: thank you for the affordance summary Benjamin. the distinction between features and affordances is helpful
… and the fact that UA’s use the affordance to enable features is useful
… Going back to the google doc https://goo.gl/mTxMDL
… I’d like to be clear about the scope of our
… so that we don’t have to deal with scope creep
… we’re only focused on affordances that have a pathway to features in the UA via the specification track
… we shouldn’t take on affordance related issues that might be enabled by other standards or other WGs
… that’s something we’ll have to take into account on a case by case basis
… accessibility and personalization are both things that may have affordance needs
… but they will also need to have related features in UAs to enable them as accessible features, etc.
… does that sound relatively straight forward?
Wolfgang Schindler: as George mentioned there is a data aspect on the part of the publication
… but you need some hooks in your data for the UA to offer some feature
… do we see those as data requirements?
… we need to express that these affordances have a pathway to the features we want in the UA
Mateus Teixeira: yes. we need to define and clarify these pathways
… I’m going to need help from the wider group who have more of a technical background than I do
… certainly we need to clarify that these are spec-able and not just recommendations
Zheng Xu: are we looking toward testing?
Mateus Teixeira: yes. that sounds useful
Ivan Herman: it’s useful, but we have to be careful that we only test normative things from a spec perspective
… and that some of these things will be expressed as non-normative things
Zheng Xu: I wonder should we also work with some other WGs such as CSS
… about some of these issues we may have?
Mateus Teixeira: I don’t think that item is about limiting what we can do
… so much as proactively looking for the things that are in some other WG’s domain
… but we’d still want to monitor the progress, etc, if we need those things done
… we need to filter out what we can do vs. what we can’t
Zheng Xu: my second question about personalization
… it’s a pretty wide space
… I hope we can define what we want to do here
Jasmine Mulliken: is that one of the bigger issues we discuss on Monday? tzviya?
… it’s #138
Jasmine Mulliken: https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/138
Mateus Teixeira: it is more complicated than it seems
… and we need to be very focused on the accessibility issues
… and it’s great that we have people who can help us navigate that as part of this group
Zheng Xu: we need to both enable vendor options as well as work for interoperable personalization across vendors
2. Work Items
Mateus Teixeira: looks like the queue is empty
… so let’s move on to work items
Mateus Teixeira: https://github.com/w3c/wpub/labels/topic%3Aaffordances
Mateus Teixeira: let’s look at this list as a starting point
… this will take you to all the
topic:affordances labeled issues
… we need to go through this list and put them through our filtering
… to find an implementation pathway
… and what things we might need to let go of
… or pass on to some other WG to do
… and ivan made a “propose closing” label to help move things along the process
… so let’s start there
Katie Haritos-Shea: there are a few of these like reading order which I’d be happy to take
Mateus Teixeira: if you’re able and ready to take on some of these, by all means!
Mateus Teixeira: https://www.w3.org/TR/pwp-ucr/
Mateus Teixeira: the next item is really reviewing the use cases
… and matching the against our issues
… this document really outlines what we hope to enable with a Web Publication
… it is very helpful to find our list of requirements or expectations
Tzviya Siegman: Josh Pyle and Laurent Le Meur are responsible for keeping the UCR up to date
Mateus Teixeira: so besides our GitHub issues list, may we also reconsider this use case document
… additionally we may also need to make some of these part of PWP
… or that are better done there than within just WP
… again, our primary focus is on affordances for WP
… so I’d suggest we focus there first
Ivan Herman: so. first of all, yes for your last comment
… for those who look over the use case doc to make links to whichever affordances we are considering
… at the end of the day it would be great that for each affordance we make explicit reference to each of the requirements
… and explain how it’s backed up by these use cases
… the more we keep that as part of our process, the easier it will be at the end
… for the time being, just make not somewhere—in the issue or somewhere—then later Matt and I can work out getting it into the text
Jasmine Mulliken: yeah. I think that’s a great idea.
Mateus Teixeira: great. that will definitely help use clarify these affordances
Mateus Teixeira: https://github.com/w3c/wpub/issues/143
Mateus Teixeira: let’s go after issue #143
… we should also correspond this one to the use case requirements (UCRs)
… it seems we should get on with this one sooner rather than later
Tzviya Siegman: +1
Mateus Teixeira: and then we can use that template going forward
… I’d ask that all of us take a look at this #143
… as it will greatly help our progress on the other issues
… once we start clarifying some of the issues on GitHub, then we’ll start forming them into this template
… and run it through some other filters such as data requirements and making sure there’s a pathway to implementation
Benjamin Young: I’d not slow down on serialization discussions, but do define what the general data needs are to get to the end-goal feature (via the affordance)
… for instance treating a WP as a collection of documents is part of affording search and progression
Mateus Teixeira: I do think we may need to add parts into the template about that
Ivan Herman: one more sort of warning to ourselves
… we should not solve all the miseries of the world in the coming 2 months
… we need to have a first viable product soon
… so 80% of the needs perhaps
… there will always be a 20% who will be unhappy
… at the present time, we should live with that
… we really don’t want to get carried away by discussions—and it’s very easy to do that
… for all of us
Mateus Teixeira: agreed we do need to avoid scope creep
… for the template discussion, I can send a follow-up email
Ivan Herman: email or issues comments?
Mateus Teixeira: I’ll do issue comments to keep things together
… can anyone take that item?
Zheng Xu: yes. I think I can do that
Mateus Teixeira: thank you. let’s aim for the end of March for that
… we don’t have anyone looking at the UCR doc atm
Katie Haritos-Shea: I can do it, but I’m not sure what you want out of it
Mateus Teixeira: yeah. it doesn’t have to be done before the template is ready
… but if we can get some discussion done while that’s being ready
… then we can do some writing after March
Tzviya Siegman: I did much of the UCR to issue mapping already
Tzviya Siegman: Laurent and Josh Pyle
Tzviya Siegman: Josh Pyle and Laurent are keeping UCR things up to date
Tzviya Siegman: it also looks like David Wood is back to active
… and he can probably help here
Mateus Teixeira: those are all the work items we’ve identified so far
… if anyone thinks of anything else, we can set something up for a future call as well
… for the meantime, let’s keep things on GitHub and use email for side discussions
Jasmine Mulliken: don’t wait on the template to be done before you comment on the issues
Katie Haritos-Shea: so find categories to help describe the issues?
Jasmine Mulliken: yes. so find categories like “normative” and “non-normative” etc.
… we don’t have to wait on the template to have our discussions and organize things
Ivan Herman: in my practice it’s very helpful to have a fixed day/time for these meetings
… it’s early for Jasmine
… and if we move it though, then Avneesh runs into time issues
… Friday a bit later than now is still doable for both ends so to say
Mateus Teixeira: one of the problems for this month is loads of conferences this month and next
… I’ll be sure to get something on the calendar and get it out with plenty of advance notice
Ivan Herman: I’ll get these minutes up to our website
… you can try and do it on the github
Tzviya Siegman: yeah. it’s not that magical
… ivan is the only one who can clean up the minutes
Ivan Herman: it’s my job
Mateus Teixeira: bye all!