Meeting minutes
wendy: let's start with open issues
Relationship to Accessibility Specs - w3c/epub-specs#2720
wendy: the desire is to make clear relationship with WCAG/ARIA/EPUB-A11Y.
DaleRogers: what is our lane, how do we stay in our lane? when we write the spec, we have different audiences, how do we care of them?
ivan: the spec is a tech document, the target is tech people producing ebooks, tools and reading systems. We probably should have a different document on how to create epubs.
… what Matt is seing is that the section refers to stds that are directly relevant for EPUB, not those which are indirectly referenced, like SVG (which depends on HTML). EPUB depends on the sister stds, like the accessibility docs.
… listing all others is going to far.
AvneeshSingh: epub a11y, wcag put constraints on EPUB. HTML SVG are building blocks. DPUB ARIA is a dependency, the other are not adding to the standard.
CharlesL: I see the point. Something is missing. To make an accessible EPUB you need these things. EPUB has a relationship with DPUB ARIA. I would be in favor of adding it to the A11Y spec.
wendyreid: I think we didn't do that before because it was a draft. We can reference it now. There is a one-sentence in the spec; maybe we should add to it.
… our audience is mixed. We made the spec readable. We should listen to feedback.
ivan: EPUB could reference the a11y spec and the reading system spec; and the a11y spec can reference DPUB ARIA. For me it is a different level.
AvneeshSingh: DPUB ARIA is designed to provide semantic info to EPUB, it is a building block.
… ARIA is going beyond a11y.
ivan: why no rdf-a in this case? it is used in html.
wendyreid: RS process DPUB ARIA. It is impactful for content creators, more than rdf-a.
… next topic
Footnotes in EPUB3 - w3c/epub-specs#2690
<gpellegrino> epubtests.org :)
wendyreid: there is a need for a note about how to create good footnotes. The DAISY KB is a source. It would be good to have a test file and check RS. So that content creators get feedback.
ivan: we can use the existing test environment, initially created for spec CR. Some of these tests would be linked to a best practice document.
<gpellegrino> sorry right link: https://
CharlesL the a11y tf discusses extended descriptions, with test. It could be moved to such environment.
… originally the epub:type was a trigger for popup footnotes. Now doc-footnote is the trigger. We should tease it in a test suite.
wendyreid: the best practice may be to recommend both.
ivan: as staff, the question is if the WG is ok to start such a work item, with a WG document.
LaurentLM: We have the DAISY knowledge base, which is already the bet practice, should we duplicate it?
… should we discuss with DAISY if we can use it as a source of truth?
DaleRogers: I can help Suzan on such a best practice document.
AvneeshSingh: to elaborate on Laurent's comment. At Daisy we are working on extended descriptions. We'll update the KB.
CharlesL: We would add to the test page, not create a full best practice document.
ivan: we should not duplicate the effort with the Daisy KB. We can have a meeting to discuss where Suzan can help.
wendyreid: we can write the test.
ivan: we should try to make use of both groups.
AvneeshSingh: regarding the Daisy KB, it is huge, on a11y and beyond. In Daisy tools in case of error there are links to the KB. It is part of a Web of tools.
wendyreid: the missing piece for EPUB creators is "it is working hre and here".
CharlesL: the KB could reference these W3C tests.
… the Daisy KB is maintained by Matt.
Signify that an EPUB uses HTML - w3c/epub-specs#2761
wendyreid: about adoption on HTML there were already suggestions. Major version EPUB4, change the extension, check the OPF ...
gpellegrino: I'm in favor of a different version number in the OPF. It is the only way for RS to announce something to the end user. If not, the RS will not announce anything before breaking.
duga: I hear about old RS, what they do or not. But how big is their market share? Who are they? What would they do in these scenarios (media-types are usually wrong)?
… before we decide, we have to understand. A list of RS, and some way to test.
CharlesL: perfect example where we can create test files with different options and check RSs.
DaleRogers: as a web designer and teacher, I said to may students open a tag, close a tag. RS are smart enough to forgive unclosed tags. Most browsers are smart enough to ajust. I'm wondering if EPUB RS can be smart enough.
https://
wendyreid: I'm also curious about RS reactions on HTML.
… Suzan opened a thread on Mobileread.
… if we use the EPUB version in the OPF, EPUB creator will use a static EPUB 3.4 even if they don't use HTML.
Hadrien: a different media-type is a solution, the EPUB version in the OPF is not properly processed by RS.
… with all the things we are discussing, a version number may be needed, but usually we register a media-type and extension.
duga: non well-formed documents are not possible in XML.
ivan: HTML is know to be less strict.
… I'm worried that we are running ahead. I hope we'll see answers in the survey. Will today's RS are easily transformable into HTML-processors? If none of the big RS around (Readium, Apple, Kobo, Amazon ...) all way we won't do that until we are forced, and publishers say we won't do that because RS don't process that, then we'll be stuck.
LaurentLM: We need to talk about distributors too
… they can block this if they say no
… if its not distributed, you won't find people to make it
LaurentLM: Some distributors are retailers, but many are intermediaries between publishers and retailers
… some transform EPUB, like Amazon, but others don't, or only make partial changes, they use other checking tools like EPUBCheck or others
Hadrien: distributors mostly rely on EPUBCheck and ACE. They don't check content too much, but they process publications to generate samples, watermark content, inject marketing material ... Most processes rely on XML.
DaleRogers: if we create a version of the spec that distributors and RS do not handle, are we advancing the medium.?
gpellegrino: Apple has its own validator. Do the chair have plans to reach such big players?